M.Chockalingam, J. - (1.) CHALLENGING the judgement of acquittal of respondents 1 to 4 made by the Additional Sessions Division, Fast Track Court-II, Chennai in S.C.No,479/2006, the State has brought forth this appeal.
(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated as follows: (a) P.W.1 was the resident of Dhiwan Bahsiyam street Saidapet, Chennai. On 2.7.2004 at 9.00 p.m., when P.W.1 was selling ice in a cart at Karaneeshwarar Koil Street, A1 asked for change for Rs.100/-. P.W.1 also gave change. When A1 was moving from the place, P.W.1 noticed that Rs.100/- note given by A1 looked different. Immediately, he showed the said currency to P.W.2 and also to P.W.3. THEy also told that the said currency note looked different. Immediately, they caught hold of A1 and questioned her. A1 gave back the change to P.W.1 and got back the 100 rupee counterfeit currency note. Further, P.Ws 1 to 3 found, 24 such 100 currencies in her money purse. Immediately, P.Ws. 1 to 3 took A1 to J1 Saidapet Police Station and handed over A1 along with a complaint Ex.P1 to the Police. Those 24 counterfeit Rs.100/- counterfeit currency notes were marked as M.O.1 series. (b) P.W.5 Inspector of Police, Guindy Police Station, on receipt of Ex.P1 complaint, registered a case in Crime No. 654/2004 under section 489- B & C I.P.C. and arrested A1 and recovered 24 numbers of counterfeit notes from her under Form 95 before P.Ws. 2 and 3. THE F.I.R. registered by him was filed as Ex.P8. THE confessional statement given by A1 was recorded before P.W.2 and P.W.3 THE admissible part of the confessional statement was marked as Ex.P9. Following the confessional statement, A1 identified A2. When A2 was arrested, he came forward to give the confessional statement voluntarily and the same was recorded and 113 counterfeit numbers of 100 rupee counterfeit currency notes were seized under a mahazar and on the same day he arrested A3 who gave confessional statement and the same was recorded and 10 numbers of 100 rupee currency notes were seized from A3 under a mahazar and on 6.7.2004, A4 was arrested in front of Race course, Chennai and the confessional statement given by A4 was recorded. On 3.7.2004, the accused were sent for judicial remand. THE counterfeit currencies recovered were also sent to Court through Form 95. On 6.7.2004, A4 was arrested. THE confessional statement given by A4 was also recorded. A4 was also sent for judicial remand. On completion of the investigation, P.W.5 made a requisition before the IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, for sending 147 counterfeit currency notes to India Security Press, Mharastra State for examination. (c) THE case was transferred to C.B.C.I.D. for further investigation. THE Assistant Works Manager in India, Security and Currency Note Press, Nasik was examined as P.W.6 and he has stated that on 24.5.2005 he received a requisition from IX Metropolitan Magistrate in a sealed cover with letter from and also 147 numbers of 100 rupee notes for examination and opinion. After receiving the same, the pockets were opened. THE notes were examined and after exercise of the test, he came to the conclusion that those notes were counterfeit notes. THE experts opinion was marked as Ex.P.14. (d) On 18.8.2005, P.W.7 Inspector of C.B.C.I.D. of Counterfeit Currency Wing, took up further investigation and on 30.8.2005, after receipt of the expert opinion, filed the charge sheet against the accused. (e) THE case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Necessary charges were framed. In order to substantiate the charges against the accused, the prosecution examined 7 witnesses and relied on 14 exhibits and 3 material objects viz., M.O.1 series- 24 counterfeit notes, M.O.2 series- 10 counterfeit notes and M.O.3 series- 113 counterfeit notes. After completion of the evidence on the side of the prosecution, the accused were questioned under section 313 Cr.P.C. and they denied them as false. No defence witness was examined. THE trial Court heard the arguments advanced on either side and took the view that the prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the accused/respondents herein. Hence, this appeal at the instance of the State. Advancing the arguments on behalf of the State, learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the trial Court has taken an erroneous view that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution has examined P.Ws. 1 to 3 to prove the fact that A1 was in possession of the counterfeit currency notes and she was caught red handed and was produced before the respondent Police. On arrest, she has produced M.O.1 series-24 counterfeit currency notes. Pursuant to the confession of A1, all the three accused were arrested and at the time of arrest, they gave confessional statement. M.O.2 series- counterfeit currency notes were recovered from A2 and equally M.O.3 series-counterfeit currency notes were recovered from A3 and all these counterfeit currency notes were sent for test to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance Currency Note Press, Nasik Road and the same were examined through P.W.6 and the report Ex.P.14 given by the press was marked. Thus, the prosecution has proved that the accused were in possession of the counterfeit currency notes. Added further learned counsel, it is true that there was certain discrepancies but they were very minor. The trial Court has given undue weightage to those discrepancies and recorded the order of acquittal which has got to be set aside. The trial Court was erroneous in stating that the prosecution failed to prove that the places from where the recoveries were effected from A2 and A3 belonged to A2 and A3. It is pertinent to point out that no such proof was necessary and the recovery, at the instance of the accused, was alone important. In the instant case, all the necessary ingredients under section 489 -B & C were actually proved, since the possession of the counterfeit currency with the accused was actually established and A1 has also made an attempt to change the same to lesser denomination and it would be indicative of the fact that the accused knew that they were counterfeit currency and she also attempted to use them as genuine. Under such circumstances, the trial Court should have found the accused guilty, but have acquitted them. Hence, the judgment of the trial Court has got to be set aside and the accused have got to be dealt with properly in accordance with law.
(3.) THE Court heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondents on the above contentions and paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made. The gist of the case of the prosecution, as could be seen above, was that on 2.7.2004, at about 9.30 p.m. A1 approached P.W.1 who was selling ice in a cart and asked change for 100 rupee note. P.Ws. 2 and 3 were also present at that time. Accordingly. P.W.1 gave change but when P.W.1 looked at the 100 rupee note it looked different. The same fact was ascertained by P.Ws. 2 and 3 Immediately, they caught A1 and searched her bag which contained 24 counterfeit notes of 100 rupees denomination and they produced A1 before P.W.5 Inspector of Police in the Police Station who registered a case against her. On confession, the said currency notes, 24 in number, were seized under a mahazar and they are marked as M.O.1 series. Following the same, A2 and A3 were arrested and the counterfeit currency notes were recovered from them and they were marked as M.O.2 and M.O.3 series. A4 was also arrested. The trial Court has made an order of acquittal of the accused stating that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.;