LIYAKAT ALI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals have been filed by the appellants Liyakat Ali, Mehboob Ali, Mohd. Firoz, Anju Ali, Mazhar, and PooranmalSaini against the judgment dated December 17, 2005 of Special Court (fake currency cases), Jaipur in sessions case No. 31 of 2004 whereby the accused appellants Pooranmal, Anju Ali, and Majhar were convicted and sentenced for offence under Sections 489-C for 3 years RI, for Sections 489- B read with Section 120-B, IPC five years RI, and fine of Rs. 1,000 each. In default to further undergo one month SI, accused appellants Firoz and Mehboob were convicted and sentenced under Sections 489-B read with Section 120-B, IPC for five years RI and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to suffer one month SI. Accused appellant Liyakat Ali was convicted and sentenced under Section 489-B, IPC for 10 years RI and fine of Rs. 1,000, in default to suffer one month SI, under Section 489-B read with Section 120-B, IPC five years RI, and fine of Rs. 1,000 each, in default to further undergo one month SI, under Section 489-C for 3 years RI, and under Section 489-D, IPC for 10 years RI and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default one month SI. The appellants Anju Ali and Majhar's sentence was suspended by this Court on January 12, 2006. The sentence of Pooranmal, appellant was suspended on January 17, 2006. The sentence of Mahboob Ali and Mohd. Firoz was suspended by this Court on Feb. 1, 2006. Except appellant Liyakat Ali, all appellants are on bail.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on January 6, 2004 one Ajit Singh ASI, lodged a written report at Police Station Ramganj, Jaipur to the effect that on that day one Purshottam FC No. 4426 was sent to Jaipur City for searching Pooranmal in case No. 459 of 2003. He was instructed to inform after search about this accused. Purshottam FC informed over telephone that accused Pooranmal is walking in Sanjay Bajar, Ghatgate and he is watching him. On this information Ajit Singh along with FC Jai Singh No. 6290, driver Hanuman and one Mahavir Singh ASI went in a Government vehicle Gypsy at Sanjay Bajar where FC Purshottam was found present who informed by indication to SI Ajit Singh that the person standing ahead the wine shop and wearing black jacket, is Pooran Mal Saini. On this the complainant ASI along with his companions reached near that person and asked his name. He told his name to be Pooranmal Saini son of Ramniwas aged 33 years, by caste Mali R/o Jeevaram Ki Dhani, Gudhana Police Station Bagad District Jhunjhunu at present C- 5 Bhagirathy colony Police Station Vidhayakpuri, Jaipur. He was interrogated in FIR No. 459 of 2003 for offence under Sections 420 and 406, IPC. On searching him, one mobile phone, telephone diary, Pan Card and Rs. 500 were found with him. On checking 5 currency notes, 3 currency notes were having No. 3HN408622 and 2 currency notes were having No. 9 ST 580755. On suspicion these currency notes were throughly checked then 3 currency notes were found having similar number of one series and 2 notes were found having similar number of one series. Reserve Bank of India never issued notes having similar number of one series, therefore the currency notes were found to be fake. On enquiry about these currency notes from accused Pooranmal then he accepted the same to be fake. The notes were seized by the police for verification. On receipt of above report a case FIR No. 14 of 2004 for offence under Sections 489-C and 120-B, IPC was registered and investigation commenced. During investigation on enquiry, Pooranmal informed that he received the forged currency notes for Mehboob, Firoz and Ramgopal. On the information of Pooranmal, Mehboob and Firoz were arrested. On the information furnished by Pooranmal Rs. 41,900 forged currency notes were seized. Mahboob and Firoz informed that they received the forged notes from one Anju Ali, Anju Ali was also arrested and on his information Rs. 1,75,000 were recovered. On enquiry from Anju Ali he informed that he was receiving fake currency notes from Majhar. Majhar was arrested and on his information fake currency notes of Rs. 48,220 were recovered from his possession. Majhar told that he was receiving forged currency notes from Liyakat Ali. It was alleged that Liyakat Ali was arrested from his business place at Delhi and fake currency notes of Rs. 2,39,500/- were recovered from him along with some equipments. After completing the investigation, the police filed challan against the accused appellants and one Ramgopal. Charges were framed against appellants Pooranmal, Firoz, Mehboob, Anju Ali, Majhar and Ramgopal for offences under sections 489-B read with Section 120-B, IPC, 489-C read with Section 120-B, IPC and against accused Liyakat Ali for offence under Sections 489-A, 489- B read with Section 120-B, IPC, Section 489- C and Section 489-D, IPC. The accused appellants denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined 28 witnesses and got exhibited some documents thereafter examined accused appellants under Section 313, Cr. P.C. In defence three witnesses were examined and got exhibited five documents. After hearing both the sides the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as indicated above vide judgment dated December 17, 2005. Against this judgment of the trial Court the appellants have filed these four appeals for quashing the judgment of conviction and sentence.

(3.) Mr. S. S. Hora, learned counsel for the appellants Anju Ali, Majhar and Liyakat Ali, submitted following submissions : Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C and 489-D are not applicable and only Section 489-E can at most be applied. Section 489-E provides that whoever makes, or causes to be made or uses for any purpose whatsoever, or delivers to any person, any document purporting to be, or in any way resembling or so nearly resembling as to be calculated to deceive any currency note or bank note shall be punished with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees. The learned counsel raised the argument about the non sealing and no safety of seized currency notes. The currency notes were not capable of being used as such and were more in the nature of fancy notes. The learned counsel argued that the compliance of Section 100(4) Cr. P.C. was not made in the instant case, which is fatal to prosecution case as set out in 1993 (1) Crimes 1055 Ram Singh v. State of Haryana, 1996 Cr. LR (Raj) 389 State of Rajasthan v. J. Nagpal, 1987 Cri LJ 1539 Prem Lata v. State of H.P. makes accused entitled to benefit of doubt. The recovery shown from Delhi from accused persons is highly doubtful due to inconsistencies in evidence. The learned counsel submitted that it is a case of false implication of the accused by investigating officer. The accused made suggestions that the currency notes were in fact photocopies by the police party itself to falsely implicate the accused. The learned counsel submitted that the report received from Nasik was not mentioning number of seized currency notes. It is not possible to draw inference of forgery of currency notes as held in State of Raj v. Rajendra 1999 WLC UC 741 where also accused was acquitted. The learned counsel stated that there was no intention of the accused to use genuine counterfeit currency notes. The prosecution has not produced a single witness to state that the accused persons used or intended to use these currency notes. Intention to use the currency notes as genuine constitutes the mens rea of the offence and is an essential ingredient which is not satisfied in the instant case. The learned counsel stated that no offence under Section 489-B and 489-C is made out. He relied upon Karunakaran Nadar v. State 2000 Cri LJ 3748 and Uma Shakar v. State of Chhatisgarh AIR 2001 SC 3074 : 2001 Cri LJ 4696. The learned counsel prayed for acquittal of the accused or in the alternative all the appellants have completed about half of their sentence and they may be released on sentence already undergone by them.