Criminal Appeal No. 1402 of 2011,Criminal Application No. 365 of 2013

10th May, 2013

Petitioner Counsel: Mr. ANIKET VAGAL
Respondent Counsel: Mrs. G.P. MULEKAR

Cases Cited:
Faijan Rizvan Khan & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2742 [Para 15,53]
VPK Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. Narayan S. Naik & Anr., 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2750 [Para 15]
Ashraf Hussain Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1996 Cri. L.J. 3147 [Para 15,54]
Tulshiram Bhanudas Kambale & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1999 ALL MR (Cri) 1593 =1999 (3) Crimes 161 [Para 15]
Padam Singh Vs. State of U.P., AIR 2000 SC 361 [Para 20]

JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT :- This is an Appeal by the Original Accused No.1 in Sessions Case No.455 of 2007.

2. The Original Accused No.1/Appellant before me is aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Judgment and Order of conviction passed by the 5th Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Sewree, Mumbai dated 8th August, 2008.

3. By this Judgment and Order, the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 is convicted of the offence punishable under Section 489-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/-. In default, he has to undergo simple imprisonment for three years.

4. The operative order reads as follows :-

"01) Accused No.1 Arvind Bakelal Verma is hereby convicted as per section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for an offence punishable under section 489-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for Ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) and in default of payment of fine to suffer S.I. for three (3) years.

02) Accused No.1 Arvind Bakelal Verma is hereby convicted as per section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for an offence punishable under section 489-D of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for Ten (10) years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) and in default of payment fo fine to suffer S.I. for three (3) years.

03) Accused No.1 Arvind Bakelal Verma, accused no.2 Akhilesh Bramhadev Tiwari and accused no.03 Ramvilas Ramdhari Chauhan, are hereby convicted as per section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for an offence punishable under section 489-B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for Seven (7) years by each accused and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) by each accused and in default of payment of fine to suffer S.I. for two (2) years, by each accused.

04) Accused No.1 Arvind Bakelal Verma, accused no.2 Akhilesh Bramhadev Tiwari and accused no.3 Ramvilas Ramdhari Chauhan, are hereby convicted as per section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for an offence punishable under section 489-C of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for Five (5) years by each accused and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) by each accused and in default of payment of fine to suffer S.I. for three (3) years, by each accused.

05) Accused No.1 Arvind Bakelal Verma, accused no.2 Akhilesh Bramhadev Tiwari and accused no.03 Ramvilas Ramdhari Chauhan are hereby convicted as per section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for an offence punishable under section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for one (1) year by each accused and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) and in default of payment of fine to suffer S.I. for three (3) months, by each accused."

5. The order further directs that Accused No.2-Akhilesh Bramhadev Tiwari and Accused No.3-Ramvilas Ramdhari Chauhan are acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code.

6. The Prosecution case is that on 1st March, 2007, at about 20:10 hours, Police Inspector Giri called Police Sub-Inspector Jamil Shaikh and the Police Constables and informed them that reliable information has been received that three persons are coming near the entrance of Infinity Mall. Therefore, a trap has to be laid at that place and further action needs to be taken.

7. Thereafter, as per the orders of the Police Inspector Giri, two Panchas were summoned in his chamber. They were also informed about the information received. Thereafter, the relevant and necessary entries were made in the Station Diary and the team proceeded towards Infinity Mall, Oshiwara, Andheri (West), Mumbai. Thereafter, a trap was laid at the entrance of the said Mall. At about 20:40 hours, two persons came near the glass entrance door. The team was alerted and thereafter one more person came there at about 20:45 hours. There was some discussion between them. The person who came later on handed over two envelopes to those who had come earlier. On a signal being given, the Raiding Party effected raid, the Accused were apprehended and inquiries were made. The search of the Accused revealed counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination. It was the case of the Prosecution that three Accused who stood for trial were these very persons who had come on the relevant date and time at the said Mall and from whom the counterfeit currency notes were recovered. They were found in possession of 330 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination. These notes were sealed in the presence of Panchas. A Seizure Panchanama to that effect was prepared. While taking search of the Accused, some other articles were found in their possession. They were also seized. Thereafter the Accused along with the seized articles were taken to the Police Station. PW-1 Parshuram Bhikaji Sawant, Police Constable, filed a report on which the offence was registered as Crime No.84 of 2007. The matter was further investigated.

8. The further case of the Prosecution is that the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 gave a Disclosure Statement and which was recorded on 2nd March, 2007 in the presence of two Panchas. As per information given by the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 in his Memorandum Statement, incriminating articles, namely, a computer, a Central Processing Unit, Monitor, Printer, Scanner, Screen, which is used for printing water mark of Gandhiji, another screen, which is used for putting middle line on the note, three scales, three boxes of oil paint, cutter, bundle of papers, one cheque-book and other articles used for computer were seized. It is alleged that this seizure is from the Appellant/Original Accused No.1. A Seizure Panchanama to that effect was prepared in the presence of two Panchas. The seized counterfeit notes were sent to the Currency Note Press, Nashik in order to obtain their opinion. PW-6 PSI Jamil Ahmed Shaikh, after receiving the investigation, recorded the statement of the witnesses. After completion of the investigation, a Charge-Sheet was filed against all the three Accused in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Andheri (East), Mumbai. The learned Metropolitan Magistrate, after taking cognizance of the offence and taking into consideration the nature thereof, committed the case to the Sessions Court. The case then was tried by the Sessions Court.

9. The charges were framed for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D of the Indian Penal Code. After the charges were explained to the Appellant and other Accused in vernacular, their pleas were recorded. Each one of them pleaded not guilty and that is how they came to be tried.

10. The Prosecution examined as many as six witnesses. They were cross-examined by the Advocate for the Appellant and other Accused. The Appellant did not lead any evidence. The statement of the Appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, was recorded.

11. Upon this material, the learned Sessions Judge heard oral arguments and proceeded to render the Judgment of conviction and sentence, as reproduced above.

12. It is this Judgment and Order which is under challenge before me.

13. Mr. Vagal, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Appellant/Original Accused No.1, firstly, took me through the charge and submitted that none of the ingredients of Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code are satisfied in this case. Even with regard to possession of counterfeit coins, the case of the Prosecution is weak and the conviction and sentence on that count is also vitiated. He has taken me through the depositions of the material witnesses and, equally, the First Information Report. He submits that there are glaring inconsistencies and material omissions in the Prosecution Case. Firstly, there is difference with regard to the timings. It is not sure as to whether the raid was conducted at 20:20 hrs. or 20:40 hrs. and further whether the apprehension and seizure was at 20:00 hrs. or at 20:40 hrs. In one statement, the version is that the Police Party proceeded towards the Infinity Mall at about 20:30 hrs. If that was the case, then, within next ten minutes, it was impossible that all the three Accused allegedly came at the site, they were apprehended and the articles were seized from their possession. Apart there-from, Mr. Vagal submits that there is a serious lacunae in the further procedure adopted by the Prosecution and investigating machinery. The articles were not sealed. They were lying in the Police Station for twenty days. My attention is invited in this behalf to the deposition of PW-2 Subhash Balu Bodake and page 77 of the paper-book, which is a copy of the Panchanama dated 1st March, 2007. It is submitted by Mr. Vagal that the articles, which were allegedly seized, were not produced at the Police Station. In this behalf he submits that there is a contradiction in the version of the investigating machinery. There is absolutely no corroboration because at what time the apprehension and arrest took place and the Accused were brought at the Police Station and at what time the articles, which were seized, were produced at the Police Station has not been clarified at all. It is submitted that the same witness deposes about the raid and the arrest. It is then submitted that the Prosecution committed a serious legal infirmity in not sealing the notes and then forwarding them to the Currency Note Press, Nashik for its opinion. The notes were in unsealed condition. No Panchanama of sending the notes to the Currency Note Press, Nashik was ever drawn. There is absolutely no record as to when the notes were sent to the Currency Note Press, Nashik and the Report was received in that behalf. My attention is invited with regard to all this to the version of the Prosecution Witnesses and particularly to a copy of the confidential expert opinion on forged notes given by the Currency Note Press, Nashik Road, Maharashtra State. Mr. Vagal submits that with all these infirmities and errors, the Prosecution could not be said to have brought home the charges against the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 at all.

14. Mr. Vagal submits that the Appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. There is absolutely no proof of he being present at the site, namely, the Infinity Mall. There is absolutely no proof with regard to his complicity in the crime. There is absolutely no document, leave alone, any reliable oral version as to how the Appellant was involved in making of the counterfeit notes. None of the charges could, therefore, be said to be proved. The learned Ad-Hoc Additional Sessions Judge has committed a serious error in convicting and sentencing the Appellant/Original Accused No.1. His Judgment is vitiated by an error of law apparent on the face of record and total perversity. Mr. Vagal has pointed out a serious infirmity, according to him, and, namely, of not proving as to how the seized articles were said to be used in making of the counterfeit currency notes and particularly by the Appellant/Original Accused No.1. The exhibits in this case will show that none of the articles or machineries said to be used in making of the counterfeit currency notes have been marked in evidence. Their seizure, therefore, is not proved. Further, there is absolutely no proof as to how these very machines were recovered at the instance of the Appellant/Original Accused No.1. The persons who were examined to support the Prosecution Case particularly of acquisition of the articles from a shop dealing in computers and computer accessories have not supported the Prosecution story at all. Their cross-examination would reveal that they have absolutely no document and primary one such as invoices/bills, which would evidence that the seized articles and machineries were acquired or purchased from their shop. In such circumstances, the conviction and sentence for the charges under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code is wholly vitiated. Even as far as the offences punishable under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code are concerned, Mr. Vagal submits that the depositions of the Investigating Officer and that of the other Prosecution Witnesses read in their entirety would reveal that the Accused are not the persons who were found in possession of the alleged counterfeit currency notes. For all these reasons, he submits that the impugned Judgment be quashed and set aside and the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 be acquitted.

15. Mr. Vagal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant/Original Accused No.1, has relied upon the following decisions of this Court :-

(i) A Judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Faijan Rizvan Khan & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No.336 of 2005, decided on 7th July, 2010, reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2742.

(ii) A Judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of VPK Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs. Narayan S. Naik & Anr. in Criminal Appeal No.17 of 2010, decided on 22nd June, 2010, reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2750.

(iii) A Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ashraf Hussain Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No.97 of 1994, decided on 26th March, 1996, reported in 1996 CRI. L. J. 3147.

(iv) A Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Tulshiram Bhanudas Kambale & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No.32 of 1996 with Criminal Appeal No.71 and 83 of 1996, decided on 5th April, 1999, reported in 1999 (3) Crimes 161 : [1999 ALL MR (Cri) 1593].

16. On the other hand, Mrs. Mulekar, learned A.P.P., appearing on behalf of the Respondent-State, submitted that this is a serious offence in which the Appellant and other Accused are involved. This is a crime against the Society. The credibility of currency notes is lost when they are counterfeited and when the counterfeiting is done by persons like the Appellant in an ingenious and smart manner. Each of the Accused was aware of making of and dealing in counterfeit currency notes. They had stock of the said notes. The seizure effected would show that the counterfeit currency notes were in their possession. The version of the Prosecution is fully corroborated and supported by the independent witnesses, who have deposed as to how the articles and machines such as Computers and Scanners were acquired by the Appellant and utilized in making of counterfeit currency notes. She submits that the entire material, which is required for making the counterfeit currency notes, was found in possession of the Appellant. She submits that there is no discrepancy in the timings of the raid and the arrest. Further, there are very minor variations and which are not fatal to the Prosecution Case. Some minor omissions cannot be held to be decisive and crucial. She submits that the Arrest Panchanama, the contents of which have been proved, would show that the Appellant was the person who was making the counterfeit currency notes. She submits that the versions of PW-1 Parshuram Bhikaji Sawant, PW-2 Subhash Balu Bodake and PW-6 Jamil Ahmed Shaikh are consistent. The Seizure Panchanama, contents of which have been proved, would reveal as to how the transparent water mark having the photo of Gandhiji and the other materials would enable imprinting and making of an exact and true replica of the currency notes. Thus, the hundred rupee currency note, which was made by the Appellant, was made in the manner deposed by the witnesses. Therefore, not much can be made of the omissions of the Prosecution in formally exhibiting the documents. She submits that once the contents of the Seizure Panchanama have been proved and each one of the materials, namely, HP Colour Laser Printer etc., is capable of being utilized for making a counterfeit currency note, then, all the more the Prosecution Case should be held to be truthful and reliable. The conviction and sentence for such serious offences should not be interfered with unless the Judgment is palpably erroneous and illegal or perverse. No infirmity of this nature has been pointed out and, therefore, this Criminal Appeal be dismissed.

17. In the light of the rival submissions, the only point which arises for my consideration and determination is whether the conviction and sentence of the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code is vitiated in law and deserves to be set aside in my appellate jurisdiction and to what extent.

18. Before proceeding to scrutinize the oral and documentary evidence on record, reference can usefully be made to Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 reads as under :

"386. Powers of the Appellate Court :

After perusing such record and hearing the appellant or his pleader, if he appears, and the Public Prosecutor, if he appears, and in case of an appeal under section 377 or section 378, the accused, if he appears, the Appellate Court may, if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, dismiss the appeal, or may-

(a) In an appeal from an order of acquittal, reverse such order and direct that further inquiry be made, or that the accused be re-tried or committed for trial, as the case may be, or find him guilty and pass sentence on him according to law;

(b) In an appeal from a conviction-

(i) Reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused, or order him to be re-tried by a court of competent jurisdiction subordinate to such appellate Court or committed for trial, or

(ii) Alter the finding, maintaining the sentence, or

(iii) With or without altering the finding, alter the nature or the extent, or the nature and extent, of the sentence, but not so as to enhance the same;

(c) In an appeal for enhancement of sentence-

(i) Reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused or order him to be re-tried by a court competent to try the offence,- or

(ii) Alter the finding maintaining the sentence,

or

(iii) With or without altering the finding, after the nature or the extent, or the nature and extent, of the sentence, so as to enhance or reduce the same;

(d) In an appeal from any other order, alter or reverse such order;

(e) Make any amendment or any consequential or incidental order that may be just or proper.

Provided that the sentence shall not be enhanced unless the accused has had an opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement:

Provided further that the Appellate Court shall not inflict greater punishment for the offence, which in its opinion the accused has committed, than might have been inflicted for that offence by the Court passing the order or sentence under appeal."

19. A bare perusal thereof would reveal that the Appellate Court has a power in an appeal from an order of acquittal to reverse the said order and direct that further inquiry be made, or that the accused be re-tried or committed for trial, as the case may be, or, find him guilty and pass sentence on him according to law.

20. In so far as an appeal from a conviction and sentence, the Appellate Court can reverse the finding and sentence and acquit or discharge the accused, or order him to be re-tried by a court of competent jurisdiction subordinate to such appellate court or committed for trial. The Appellate Court can alter the finding while maintaining the sentence or with or without altering the finding, alter the nature or the extent, or the nature and extent of the sentence, but not so as to enhance the same. There are powers of enhancement of sentence in an appeal seeking enhancement to that effect. Thus, the Code has conferred very wide powers on the Appellate Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Padam Singh Vs. State of U.P., reported in AIR 2000 SC 361, held as under :-

"4. .................................................... It is the duty of an appellate Court to look into the evidence adduced in the case and arrive at an independent conclusion as to whether the said evidence can be relied upon or not and even if it can be relied upon, then whether the prosecution can be said to have been proved beyond reasonable doubt on the said evidence. The credibility of a witness has to be adjudged by the appellate Court in drawing inference from proved and admitted facts. It must be remembered that the appellate Court like the trial Court has to be satisfied affirmatively that the prosecution case is substantially true and the guilt of the accused has been proved beyond all reasonable doubt as the presumption of innocence with which the accused starts, continues right through until he is held guilty by the final Court of appeal and that presumption is neither strengthened by an acquittal nor weakened by a conviction in the trial Court. ............................"

21. Thus, there should be proper appreciation of evidence and finding has to be recorded against each witness as to why the said witness has not been believed and particularly when such witness was believed by the Trial Court.

22. I proposed to apply these tests in deciding the present Criminal Appeal.

23. The charge in this case was for the offences punishable under Sections 489-A to 489-D of the Indian Penal Code. They read thus :-

Section 489A. Counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes

[489A.Counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes.- Whoever counter-feits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting, any currency-note or bank-note, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation

For the purposes of this section and of sections 489B, [489C, 489D and 489E], the expression "bank-note" means a promissory note or engagement for the payment of money to bearer on demand issued by any person carrying on the business of banking in any part of the world, or issued by or under the authority of any State or Sovereign Power, and intended to be used as equivalent to, or as a substitute for money.]

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment-Imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for 10 years and fine-Cognizable- Non-bailable-Triable by Court of Session-Non-compoundable.

Section 489B. Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes

[489B. Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes.-Whoever sells to, or buys or receives from, any other person, or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine, any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.]

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment-Imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for 10 years and fine-Cognizable-Non-bailable- Triable by Court of Session-Non-compoundable.

Section 489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes

[489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes.-Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency- note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.]

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment-Imprisonment for 7 years, or fine, or both-Cognizable-Bailable-Triable by Court of Session-Non-compoundable.

Section 489D. Making or possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes

[489D. Making or possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes.-Whoever makes, or performs, any part of the process of making, or buys or sells or disposes of, or has in his possession, any machinery, instrument or material for the purpose of being used, or knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used, for forging or counterfeiting any currency-note or bank-note, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.]

CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE

Punishment-Imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for 10 years and fine-Cognizable-Non-bailable- Triable by Court of Session-Non-compoundable.

24. Thus, a bare reading of these provisions would indicate that Section 489-A of the Indian Penal Code deals with performing any part of the process of counterfeiting any currency-note or bank-note. Thus, whoever counterfeiting or knowingly performing any part of the process of counterfeiting any currency note or bank note shall be punished.

25. Section 489-B of the Indian Penal Code deals with using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank-notes. Therefore, whoever sells or buys or receives from any other person or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine any forged or counterfeit currency note or bank note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be punished by taking recourse to Section 489-B.

26. Section 489-C of the Indian Penal Code provides for punishment for being in possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes.

27. Section 489-D of the Indian Penal Code provides for punishment for making or possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes.

28. It is no doubt true that counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes is a very serious offence. The punishment under Section 489-A of the Indian Penal Code is imprisonment for life or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and also fine. Similar is the case with Section 489-B of the Indian Penal Code, whereas under Section 489-C of the Indian Penal Code, possession of forged or counterfeit currency note or bank-note is punishable with imprisonment upto seven years. Under Section 489-D of the Indian Penal Code, making or possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes, is equally punishable with imprisonment for life.

29. The Prosecution, therefore, must bring proof beyond reasonable doubt of the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 having been involved in each of these acts.

30. It is not necessary to repeat the prosecution version or the charge. However, it would be material to refer to the depositions of the witnesses. PW-1 Parshuram Bhikaji Sawant is a Police Constable attached to the concerned Police Station, namely, Oshiwara Police Station. He was examined on 23rd June, 2008. He states that he is attached to the said Police Station for nearly four years. Thus, at the relevant time, he was attached to the Oshiwara Police Station. He states that on the relevant date he was on duty in a day time. At about 8:00 p.m., Police Inspector Shri. Giri called him in his room along with other staff and informed them that three unknown persons are likely to come at Infinity Mall in connection of dealing with fake notes. On receiving information, PI Giri, PSI Shaikh, staff including PW-1 Parshuram Bhikaji Sawant along with two Panchas left for Infinity Mall. They left after making entries in the Station Diary. They took their positions in front of the gate and at about 8:40 p.m., two persons came there. At about 8:45 p.m., another person walked in. There was some discussion between them and one person wearing a blue shirt and jeans pant gave one pouch to another wearing khaki trouser and white colour full shirt. He also gave one pouch to another person wearing a red-blue colour T-Shirt and blue colour trouser. The pouches were of brown paper. Then, the persons tried to leave secretly the spot. However, PI Giri gave a signal and all three persons were apprehended. PI Giri made inquiry about the name of the persons. The person wearing blue shirt and jeans pant disclosed his name as the Appellant/Original Accused No.1-Arvind Bankelal Verma. The other Accused were Akhilesh Tiwari and Ramvilas Chauhan wearing, respectively, khaki and blue trousers. This witness further states that personal search of Accused Arvind Bankelal Verma was taken and he found in possession a mobile phone of Reliance Company in his shirt pocket. There was a pouch on him containing sixty-two currency-notes of Rs.100/- denomination and sixty-eight currency-notes of Rs.100/- denomination. Their serial numbers are stated. They were found in his front side pant pocket. He was found in possession of one leather purse and which was at the back side pant pocket. The purse contained one card, water mark of Gandhiji's picture, information regarding as to how HP Printer is to be operated and paper cutting regarding a fake note, his two photographs and other papers were found in the leather purse. It is not necessary to refer to the deposition of the witness in his examination-in-chief with regard to the seizure of counterfeit currency notes from other Accused. It is stated that all the Accused were informed about the reason of their arrest and thereafter they along with the seized articles came in the Police Station. This witness identifies the Accused and then what the learned Sessions Judge has recorded is that the mobile and leather purse of the present Appellant produced in the Court is the same which was seized from his shirt and pant pocket.

31. Thus, this witness has not deposed about counterfeiting of the currency notes by the Appellant or the Appellant knowingly performing any part of the process of counterfeiting the currency notes. This witness has also not deposed about the Appellant making or possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency notes, which were seized in this case.

32. Therefore, his cross-examination by the Appellant is essentially with regard to the variance in timings of the raid and arrest. Mr. Vagal has highlighted the deposition of this witness and particularly that part of his cross-examination where he admits that the Police Staff and Panchas did not give their personal searches to all the three Accused. Further, no receipt in respect of the recovery of the articles from possession of the Accused was given to them. There is an admission that no paper was given by the Police Official to the Accused in the presence of PW-1 Parshuram Bhikaji Sawant. Though this PW-1 Parshuram Bhikaji Sawant was with the Accused throughout, but he has clearly deposed that there is no list of inventory or receipt of the articles, which were seized and which came to be handed over to the Accused.

33. Then comes the deposition of PW-2 Subhash Balu Bodake. As far as PW-2 Subhash Balu Bodake is concerned, he is the Panch Witness. He was called at the Police Station by PI Giri and asked to act as Panch in connection with the information about fake currency-notes. After the witness is asked about the identity of the seized articles particularly the notes, what this witness has stated in the cross-examination is that he does not remember the name of the police person who prepared the Panchanama. He came to know the name of Shaikh and Giri while proceeding from the Police Station. It is stated by him that the Panchanama was prepared by the Police on the spot i.e. in front of the Infinity Mall. However, he could not tell the name of the Police person who took his signature on the labels. There were questions put to this witness with regard to the distance at which the Accused were standing from the gate, but, to my mind, nothing much can be made of these statements or admissions therein.

34. Even if one proceeds on the footing that this witness has proved the Panchanama of Seizure, what is material to note is that this Panchanama may have referred to some Printer or other articles, but none of these were identified, much less, proved and exhibited as being the materials which were used for counterfeiting the currency notes or making them. Thus, neither there is any reference to the instruments or materials which were used for making these counterfeit currency notes, nor is there any reference to the possession thereof with the Accused.

35. Then comes the deposition of PW-3 Mohd. Akram Ansari and on which some reliance was placed by the Prosecution.

36. PW-3 in this case is Mohd. Akram Ansari and he stated that he was requested to act as Panch. He stated in his deposition that Police informed him that they have seized fake notes. They asked him whether he is ready to act as panch. He expressed his readiness and willingness. He states that in his presence the present Accused told the Police that he has put in circulation Rs.70,000/- in the market. He disclosed the name of his two associates as Tiwari and Chauhan. Then the present Appellant is supposed to have disclosed that the computer and printer have been kept in Laljipada. Then the Police is said to have recorded the statement of the present Appellant. He signed the Memorandum Statement. Thus, this witness identifies the Memorandum Panchanama.

37. In paras 3 to 5 of his deposition of his examination-in-chief he states as under :-

"03. Thereafter we went at Lalajipada by private car. Myself, officer and accused Arvind Varma went there. The said house consist of ground plus one floor. Varma took we people on 1st floor. There was only one room on 1st floor and it was locked. The key of the lock of said door was kept upon the door. With the help of said key accused Varma has the open the lock. After opening the lock police officer, myself and accused Varma went inside of the said room. In the room there was one computer, one scanner, one printer of HP Company, one scale, one cutter, one watermark of having picture of Gandhiji. I can identify those articles, which I had seen in room, if those are shown to me.

04. The colour monitor of computer of samsang company attached with paper label now shown to me is the same. The label bears my signature. Colour monitor of computer is Articles No.09 and paper lable is at Ex.No.42. The CPU attached with label now shown to me is the same. The label bears my signature. CPU is marked at Articles No.10 and label is at Ex.No.43. Key board, mouse and wires now shown to me are the same. The label attached to the keyboard, mouse, wires it bears my signature. Keyboard, mouse and wires marked at Article No.11 collectively. The label marked at Ex.No.44. Scanner attached with the label now shown to me. It bears my signature. The Scanner is marked at Article No.12 and label marked at Ex.No.45. Printer attached with the label now shown to me, bears my signature, is the same. The printer is marked at Article No.13 and label marked at Ex.No.46. The screen which has been use for using watermark of Gandhiji. Now shown to me is the same which was also in said room. The screen is marked at Article No.14. Label is at Ex. No.47. the another screen having site of 15 x 7 inches which is use for putting the middle line on note having label now shown to me is the same. The screen is marked at Article No.15. Lable is at Ex.No.48. One box having label is opened. Three colour box now shown to me are the same. The label attached with box bears my signature. Three colour box are marked at Article No.16 collectively. The label is at Ex.No.49. Two printing colour stopper now shown to me are the same. One label attached with two printing colour stopper bears my signature. Two printing colour stopper marked at Article No.17 collectively. The label is at Ex.No.50. One black and one white cutter having one labels now shown to me are the same. Two cutter are marked at Article No.18 collectively. The labels bears my signature is at Ex.No.51 collectively. Three steel scales of 12 inches having labels now shown to me are the same. The three steel scales are marked at Article No.19 collectively. The labels is at Ex.No.52 collectively. The bundle of 244 Executive Bond papers having seal and label now shown to me are the same. The label bears my signature. The seal packet is opened in open Court. (244 Executive Bond papers are counted). The label attached to the packet bears my signature. 244 Executive Bond papers are marked at Article No.20 collectively. Label is at Ex.No.53. Rough papers bundle having label now shown to me is the same. The bundle of rough paper is marked at Article No.21 collectively and label is at Ex.No.54. Three cheque book having paper label now shown to me are the same. The bundle of cheque book has been opened in open court. One cheque book of Mandvi Bank and other two cheque books of Shramik Co-operative Bank. Three cheque books are marked at Article No.22 collectively. The labels now shown to me it bears my signature. They are at Ex. No.55 collectively.

05. The police seized all those articles in my presence. Panchnama to that effect was prepared and my signature was taken. Seizure panchanama now shown to me is the same. It bears my signature. The contents therein are correct. Seizure Panchnama is at Ex.No.56. Then along with seized articles and accused and police we came in Oshiwara P. Stn."

38. Thus, he states that all the articles were seized in his presence, Panchnama was prepared and he signed the same. Thus he is a witness to the Memorandum Panchnama and the Seizure Panchnama.

39. However, in his cross-examination, he states that he went to the Police Station for his own work. He had been there casually. He states that he went to the Police Station in the afternoon and it is not true that he was called in the night time. It is stated by him that he came back to his house on 1st March, 2007 at night time at about 9:00 p.m. However, he also states that after returning from Laljipada, he was in the Police Station for three hours. He states that the seized articles were kept in plastic bags. All seized articles were packed in Police Station, then labels were prepared by Police person and he has signed those labels. He signed the said labels in Police Station. However, he states that he does not know the number of the Car, which is stated to be a Bolero (private vehicle), by which the Police Party went to Laljipada. He states that when he went to the Police Station, the present Appellant/Original Accused No.1 was in handcuffs. He states that while preparing Panchnama, carbon copy was not prepared and single Panchnama was prepared in his presence. Copy of Memorandum Panchnama was not prepared. No xerox copy of any Panchnama or any paper was prepared in his presence. Then he states that the articles seized from Laljipada, which were brought in the Police Station, were not in one box and they were separate. Then he denies the suggestion that the Accused did not say anything to the Police in his presence. He denies that he along with the Police were not taken by the Accused to Laljipada. He denies the suggestion that no articles were seized by Police in his presence. He denies the suggestion that because of his good relations with the Police, he was being called to depose at their instance.

40. To my mind, this witness is of no assistance in proving the articles and machineries utilized for the purposes of making the counterfeit coins allegedly. He merely describes the articles contained in the box. However, it is inconceivable that the number of articles, which are referred to by him in paras 3 to 5 reproduced above, were brought to the Police Station in one box, as is denied by him. Apart there-from, by merely picking-up of these articles at Laljipada and bringing them to the Police Station in one box, so also making a list thereof will not by itself prove the charge under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code. Pertinently, this version is in direct contradiction to that of the other witnesses who stated that the Articles were packed in box.

41. In so far as that charge is concerned, the Prosecution relies upon the deposition of PW-4 Dhiren Hasmukhlal Shah.

42. I have carefully perused the said deposition with the assistance of both the learned Advocates. This is because I was informed that this person was examined as he is in computer business. He carries on business in the name and style as M/s. Mahavir Computers at Malad (West), Mumbai.

43. This witness states that he sells computers and necessary accessories. He states that, on 8th March, 2007, two or three Inspectors along with the present Appellant/Original Accused No.1 came to his shop. This witness states that he told the Police that it was the Appellant who purchased the accessories of computers from his shop. Then the witness was taken to the Oshiwara Police Station to identify the articles. He was questioned as to whether the articles shown to him were purchased from his shop and whether he sold them. The witness states that he identified all those articles purchased from his shop, namely, Laser Printer of HP Company bearing Model No.1600, one Scanner bearing Model No.2400, Central Processing Unit of Samsung Company and he states that all these articles were purchased from his shop by the Appellant Arvind Bakelal Verma. He was shown the articles, namely, Central Processing Unit (Article No.10), Scanner (Article No.12) and Laser Printer (Article No.13).

44. In the cross-examination of this witness, he admits that he is in trading business. He admits that he purchases parts and sells the parts of the computers. He admits that he used to take receipts while purchasing the parts. He used to prepare bills while selling the parts. He admits that stock registers are maintained in the shop. However, he admits that when Police came to his shop and when he was taken to the Police Station, on both the occasions, he did not hand over any receipt or stock register to the Police. He was not called upon by the Police to produce these documents. He admits that there are four servants working in the shop. The servants are doing the work of selling articles to the customers. While purchasing the articles, which are in a box, the articles along with the box are handed over to them. He states that articles were in the box and articles along with the box were handed over to the Appellant/Original Accused No.1, when he purchased these articles. This witness was specifically asked as to the colour of the articles, which were in the box. He says that there is no choice about colour of the articles and they are available only in one colour. He says that six to seven months prior to the visit of the Police along with the Appellant/Original Accused No.1, that he had sold these articles to the Appellant/Original Accused No.1. He can identify his customer. Pertinently, this witness states that the Appellant purchased these articles by giving hard cash. He states that he prepared the bill. However, while admitting that there is no identification mark, namely, serial number of the articles, he admits that articles similar to the articles which were shown to him are available in the market. His answers then are as follows :-

(When question put to the witness that whether there is any identification mark to the seized articles, witness deposed that model number of the seized articles are the identification mark.)

08. I am not sole distributor for selling the such type of articles having model number in Mumbai.

09. It is true that the serial numbers are mentioned on scanner and printer and the same are also mentioned on the boxes of those articles. I do not remember whether any label was affixed to the scanner, printer and C.P.U., when those were shown to me in police station. I had shown the purchase of those articles in my income tax record.

10. It is not correct to say that I am deposing falsely that accused No.01 Arvind Verma had been to my shop for purchasing the articles. It is not correct to say that the articles which are shown to me in Court were never sold from my shop.

11. Today, I do not remember the date of selling the articles from my shop.

12. It is not correct to say that when, today, I came in Court the police persons met to me in Court premises. It is not correct to say that I identify the accused No.01 in Court as accused No.01 was shown to me by police in Court premises. It is not correct to say that I am deposing falsely against accused No.01."

45. A scrutiny of this deposition leaves me in no manner of doubt that this witness has been unable to prove that the articles were sold by him to Original Accused No.1/Appellant before me. This witness is unable to produce any document in relation to such sale although he says that he gives bills. It is inconceivable that when he received hard cash from the Appellant and he had prepared a bill, that counter foil or copies of such bills will not be available in the record. Further, he does not maintain any stock register and if maintains one, he is unable to state as to what was the description of the articles, leave alone, its identification number. When boxes were said to be containing the articles, he states that the serial numbers are mentioned on the Scanner and the Printers and the same are also mentioned on the boxes, but he does not remember whether any label was affixed to the articles, when they are shown to him in the Police Station. Thus, when he does not remember the date of the sale, produces no record, then, rightly none of the articles stated to be instruments or materials used for making the counterfeit currency notes have been held to be proved. They were never marked as Exhibits. The Prosecution has made no attempt to have this exhibited after the deposition of PW-4 Dhiren Hasmukhlal Shah. More so, because it was PW-4 Dhiren Hasmukhlal Shah, who was examined to prove the articles or instruments used for making the counterfeit notes or stated to be a part of the process of making counterfeit notes. When the seller of these articles was not dealing in the articles, but accessories or parts, then, it is inconceivable that he would be in a position to say anything with regard to the identity of the articles shown to him. He is neither a manufacturer or distributor. If he is dealing in parts and accessories, then, unless he deposes that from these parts he assembles the Unit and sells it as such, his deposition is worthless. He is thus a got-up witness. He has no knowledge of the seizure or the case. Thus, this witness also failed to carry the Prosecution Case any further.

46. As far as PW-5 Chenaram B. Patel is concerned, he runs a shop of printing paper and ink in the name and style as M/s. Rajeshwar Enterprises. He sells papers, xerox papers, executive bond papers, visiting cards and ink. It is stated that he was examined because the Accused had purchased papers from his shop. However, in his examination-in-chief itself this witness states that the Inspector asked the Accused whether this is the same shop and he replied in the affirmative. Thereafter, the witness was asked by the Inspector as to whether he knows the Accused, but the witness states that he does not know him. However, the bundle of papers were shown to him and he stated that they are purchased from his shop. However, he does not know who purchased these papers. The colour boxes were also purchased from his shop. The colour boxes and paper bundle was shown to him, but, in his cross-examination, this witness admits that when the papers were shown to him, they were in open condition. He states that the colour boxes, which are shown to him, were purchased from his shop and the papers similar to the papers which were shown to him are available in the market. The colour boxes are also available in the market. He states that while selling articles, he used to issue bills to the customers. He states that the original bill is given to the customer and carbon copy is maintained in the record. If the amount is paid by cash, the name of the customer is not mentioned, particularly, if the customer is not a Company or a Firm. However, this witness was unable to produce any copy of the bill. In respect of the transaction of sale, the sales tax and income tax is also paid and, equally, there are account books, but none of these have been produced. Thus, this witness has been put up by the Police only to support its version that the bundles of papers were purchased from his shop. However, when this witness was unable to state anything about who purchased it, when was it purchased and failed to give any details thereof, then, even this witness cannot assist the Prosecution in proving its version or case as against the Appellant/Original Accused No.1.

47. PW-6 Jamil Ahmed Shaikh is a PSI attached to the Oshiwara Police Station in the month of March, 2007. He endorses the Prosecution story with regard to the raid, the search and the arrest. However, in his further examination-in-chief and particularly with regard to the instruments or materials for making the counterfeit currency notes, this is what he states :-

"10. After completion of memorandum statement accused Arvind Varma has stated that we will have to go at long distance so made an arrangement for vehicle. Accordingly, we called private jeep. Myself, tow panchas and our staff, accused sat in said jeep. I ask the driver to take vehicle as suggested by accused. Accordinlgy, we proceed from p.stn. and as point out and as suggested by accused we went at Laljipada (Gandhi Nagar), Kandivali (West), Mumbai. We followed the accused by walk and we were going by short lane. Then we went on first floor of the house by using iron staircases. The said area was Magayatri Chawl committee. We stop near to one room of 1st floor. Accused has inserted his hand in place i.e. about the rafter of door and has taken out the key from said place and open the lock of the said door of the room. Then myself, panch and accused entered in said room. The accused has produced all articles i.e. computer, CPU, Moniter, printer, scanner and the board having watermark of Gandhiji, three scales, three boxes of oil paint, cutter, the bundle of papers, one cheque book and other article use for computer. We seized all those articles under seizure panchanama. The label having signature of panchas and police were affix to those articles. I prepared seizure panchanama in my own handwriting. Then obtain signature of accused. The copy of panchanama was given to accused and I had obtain the signature of accused in token of acknowledgment of receiving copy of panchanama. Panchas have also signed the panchanama. Seizure Panchanama vide Ex.56 now shown to me is the same. All the articles now shown to me are the same, which I had seize on said spot.

11. Then by calling two panchas, I had taken out the some notes as random sample in presence of panchas. Then I prepared panchanama and again seal those notes and also seal the random sample of notes. Then I sent those sample notes to the currency press note, at Nashik for verification. Then I was informed by the said currenty press note, Nashik to sent all seize notes. Thereafter, we inserted the notes which were taken as random sample in bundle of notes. Now say that random sample notes were kept separately and alongwith remaining seize notes those random sample notes were sent to currency press notes, at Nashik. We seize in all 330 notes from the possession of three accused. Three seize envelopes are shown to the witness and witness depose that those three envelopes are pertaining to seize random sample notes. Three open envelopes having seals vide Ex.No.37 (collectively) now shown to me are the same. Two bundle of the notes vide Article No.8 (collectively) now shown to me are the same. We received the report that the notes in questions are fake note, from currency press note, Nashik. The forwarding letter now shown to me is the same by which I send notes in question to currency press note, Nashik. The letter bears signature of our Sr. P.I. The letter is marked at Ex.No.63. We received acknowledgment letter in respect of receiving those notes, from currency press note, Nashik. The said letter is at Ex.No.64. The report which I have received from currency press note, Nashik regarding the notes in question is the same which is now shown to me. The report is at Ex.No.65."

48. However, in his cross-examination, he admits that when the Police apprehended the Accused, people also gathered there. He or PI Giri did not ask the name of the persons who were apprehended. One Police Constable, who was with the Police Party, took search of the persons. When question was put to this witness, particularly, it is the Panch who took the search of the persons and who asked their names in presence of Panchas, he replied that search of these persons was taken by the Police Constable.

49. However, in his cross-examination, he states that the Arrest Panchnamas in printed form were prepared. He also states that he did not make any inquiry with regard to the ownership of the room where the Police were taken by the Appellant. He also did not find it necessary to make inquiry whether somebody was residing along with the Appellant in the room. He admits that he does not remember who is the owner and from which spot and who called the private vehicle for going to Laljipada. He denies the suggestion that no articles were seized from the house or possession of Arvind Bakelal Verma. To a question, he states in reply that he did not find it necessary to send the seized computer, scanner, printer and counterfeit currency notes for chemical analysis. Pertinently, he admits that he did not call upon the shop owner Dhiren Hasmukhlal Shah (PW-4) to produce the sale receipts in respect of the computer, scanner and printer. He did not call upon Chenaram B. Patel (PW-5) to produce sale receipts in respect of the articles sold from his shop. Further, his deposition with regard to how the articles were sealed and how they were sent to the Currency Note Press, Nashik, would go to show that this witness, who was part of the Raiding Party, does not know as to where the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 resides, who was the owner of the room, how many articles were seized, if they are acquired from the shops of PW-4 Dhiren Hasmukhlal Shah and PW-5 Chenaram B. Patel, why there are no receipts evidencing such sale or deals. Therefore, the deposition of this witness and non-examination of PI Giri would go to show that far from there being any material or instrument, which is stated to be seized, none of these materials or instruments, which are seized, were used by the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 in making of the counterfeit currency notes. Thus, there is absolutely no evidence against the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 for convicting and sentencing him for the act of counterfeiting currency notes or for performing any part of counterfeiting knowingly. Equally, there is no evidence against the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 for holding him guilty of the act of making or performing any part of the process of making or buying or selling or disposing of any machinery, instrument or material for forging or counterfeiting currency notes or bank notes. Thus, for supporting the charge under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code, there is no evidence on record. The Prosecution has miserably failed to prove these charges.

50. I am rather surprised as to how the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 guilty and convicted him of the offences punishable under aforesaid Sections. Precisely for this reason, the very evidence, which has been referred extensively by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, has been referred and scrutinized by me. The detailed scrutiny of the evidence on record leaves me in no manner of doubt that the essential ingredients of the offences punishable under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code have not been proved and satisfied at all. The learned Additional Sessions Judge had before him no proof and yet he proceeded to convict the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 of these charges. In a very lengthy Judgment what the learned Additional Sessions Judge has done is that he has referred to the examination-in-chief and the cross-examination. However, there is no appraisal or appreciation thereof. This is most unsatisfactory manner of deciding a Criminal Case. What one finds is that the learned Judge holds that the evidence on record clearly goes to show that the Appellant is the person who was found in possession of incriminating articles. This finding is totally perverse to say the least. The evidence and particularly the depositions of PW-2 Subhash Balu Bodake, PW-4 Dhiren Hasmukhlal Shah, PW-5 Chenaram B. Patel and PW-6 Jamil Ahmed Shaikh, would go to show that there is no documentary proof to show that the articles seized were incriminating articles. The water mark containing Gandhiji's photo was the only material or instrument referred to by Mrs. Mulekar. That has not been held by the learned Additional Sessions Judge to be a instrument or article for making the notes, leave alone, any machine. The learned Additional Sessions Judge specifically has in mind the printer, the computer and the scanner as the instruments or materials used for making or counterfeiting currency notes in this case. However, these articles were stated to be acquired from the shop of PW-4 Dhiren Hasmukhlal Shah. He has, by virtue of his fatal admissions in the cross-examination, miserably failed to prove that these articles were sold by him and purchased by the present Appellant. Thus, assuming that the computer, printer and scanner are the instruments or materials, which can be utilized for making or forging counterfeit currency notes or bank notes, there is absolutely nothing on record of this case which would prove that such instruments or materials were used in making counterfeit currency notes. Further, this act was performed by the Appellant and lastly that the said instruments or materials were found in possession of the Appellant. Thus, the findings in para 93 of the impugned Judgment and Order are vitiated by an error of law apparent on the face of record. The learned Additional Sessions Judge referred to the evidence on record and water mark of Gandhiji, which was found in possession of the Appellant. However, he failed to notice that the articles stated to be incriminating, namely, computer, printer, scanner and bond paper were neither exhibited and proved, nor the evidence in that behalf is said to be convincing and satisfactory. There is no basis for the finding that all these incriminating articles were found in possession of the Appellant/Original Accused No.1. Even the recovery of these articles cannot be said to be proved. There is absolutely nothing to establish and prove the recovery at the instance of the Appellant/Original Accused No.1. Therefore, the Prosecution has not proved the offences punishable under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code. Once the other Accused could not be said to be guilty of these offences on the basis of the same version and testimony, then, I fail to understand as to how the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 is said to be guilty. Even if he alone can be held to be guilty, still, there has to be cogent, satisfactory and convincing evidence. There is absolutely no evidence and the depositions of the above witnesses could not have been relied upon by the Prosecution to bring home the charges. That the learned Additional Sessions Judge still feels that these were adequate materials to convict the Appellant and sentence him of such serious charges, goes to show that there is complete non-application of mind on his part. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has failed to perform his duty as a Trial Judge. He was the one who had recorded the evidence. He had full opportunity to observe the witnesses and their demeanor in the witness box. Once such an opportunity was available to him, he should have been careful and cautious while rendering such findings. The findings are, therefore, clearly vitiated by non consideration of the material inconsistencies and contradictions in the Prosecution's case. None of the ingredients of the offences and the charges in so far as these Sections are concerned can be held to be proved. It is for these reasons that the finding of guilt and conviction recorded in so far as these offences are concerned is liable to be reversed. It is accordingly reversed and set aside.

51. In so far as the offences punishable under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code are concerned, I am unable to accept the argument of Mr. Vagal that the Appellant in this case was not using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes. The evidence in that behalf clearly goes to show that the counterfeit currency notes were found in possession of all the three Accused and they were seized from their possession. The findings in para 95 of the impugned Judgment and Order are based on and consistent with the oral and documentary evidence on record. In so far as using as genuine the counterfeit currency notes and possession thereof is concerned, the Prosecution can safely be said to have brought home the charges. The proof in that behalf is beyond reasonable doubt. The contradictions and inconsistencies highlighted by Mr. Vagal cannot be said to be material or fatal. The discrepancy in the timings and the errors committed in proving the Seizure Panchnama and Memorandum Panchnama will not assist the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 in this case. There is no explanation from the Accused as to how these notes were found in their possession and they had no knowledge of they being forged or counterfeit. The notes were admittedly not genuine but counterfeit, as held by the Security Currency Press. It was for the Appellant to explain how they dealt with them and in what circumstances. That the parcels or bags containing these notes were recovered from them is proved. That they dealt with them is also proved. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly held all the three Accused guilty of the charges for offences punishable under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code. In so far as the charge punishable under Section 120-A of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, it will have to be held that for the offences punishable under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code, the materials point out that the three persons came at a particular place, handed over envelopes containing counterfeit currency notes and their coming together and handing over the parcels or bags to each other would go to show that they had agreed to do an illegal act of dealing with counterfeit currency notes. The charge in that behalf is thus held to be proved.

52. As a result of the above discussion, this Criminal Appeal of Original Accused No.1 is partly allowed. The conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 489-A and 489-D of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, the same is quashed and set aside and the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 is acquitted of the said charges. However, the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 is held to be guilty of the charges punishable under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction and sentence in that behalf is not interfered with. The Appellant's Advocate submits that the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 has undergone sentence of seven years and eight months for the offences punishable under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code. He has defaulted in payment of fine. The learned Additional Sessions Judge had directed the Appellant/Original Accused No.1 to undergo sentence of three years in default of payment of fine. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case and that the Appellant being in custody for seven years and eight months, the sentence in default of payment of fine is reduced to eight months. The Appellant having already undergone the same, he shall be released from custody in the event he is not required in any other case.

53. Mr. Vagal has relied upon the Judgments of this Court and particularly in the case of Faijan Rizvan Khan & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra in Criminal Appeal No.336 of 2005, decided on 7th July, 2010, reported in 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 2742. I have relied upon the very principle which has been reiterated in this case in acquitting the present Appellant for the offences punishable under Section 489-D of the Indian Penal Code. However, the conviction and sentence under Sections 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code is upheld by the learned Single Judge and equally by me in this case because the finding in that behalf was in consonance with the oral and documentary evidence.

54. As far as the decision of the Division Bench in the case of Ashraf Hussain Shah Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in 1996 CRI. L. J. 3147, is concerned, the principle therein in so far as non-examination of material witness is concerned, has been relied upon by me.

55. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that all witnesses of the Prosecution need not be called but it is important that witnesses whose evidence is essential for unfolding the narrative should be called. In this case, non-examination of PI Giri was thus fatal to the Prosecution. There is no explanation forthcoming as to why he was not examined. In such circumstances, the reliance placed on these two Judgments by Mr. Vagal is apposite. I have taken assistance of these very Judgments in allowing this Criminal Appeal partially.

Appeal partly allowed.