Gaya Raj Kushwaha vs State of U.P.

Barkat Ali Zaidi, J.—Heard Sri Maqsood Ahmad, counsel for the applicant Gaya Raj Kushwaha and Sri R. K. Maurya, Addl. Government Advocate for the State. Learned Counsel for the applicant filed copy of the charge-sheet and form of charge framed against the accused. It be placed on record.

Applicant-accused Gaya Raj Kushwaha, is charged for offences under Sections 420, 489B (non-bailable) and 489C (bailable), P.S. G.R.P. district Gorakhpur, for having found in his possession currency notes of Rs. 49,300 and for trying to use the same.

Counsel for the accused-Appellant says that Section 489C is bailable offence, and bail should, therefore, be granted. The case (S.T. No. 42 of 2007) is pending in the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Gorakhpur, and the charges have been framed.

It is surprising to note that the Presiding Officer framed charges under Sections 489C and 489D, and did not frame a charge u/s 489B. Section 489B is as follows :

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.

The prosecution version is that the accused-applicant was travelling in a train without ticket, on being charged, he gave to the Travelling Ticket Inspector two currency notes of Rs. 100 and two currency notes of Rs. 50 each, which were found to be fake. It is, therefore clear that he tried to use fake currency notes and the case of the accused is clearly covered by Section 489B and a charge should have been framed, thereunder.

It is also significant to note, that the fake currency notes of Rs. 49,300 was recovered from him. What is, therefore, required, is that a charge u/s 489B should also be framed against the accused and the enormous error, committed by the Presiding Officer, shall be rectified.

Counsel for the accused-applicant has referred to a case Uma Shanker v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2002 (1) JIC 165 (SC): 2001 (3) ACR 2676 (SC), wherein, it has been held that there was no material in the evidence to show, that the accused in the case used the fake currency Notes, knowing and having reason to believe the same, as fake. The aforesaid case was an appeal, arising out of final disposal of a case, and the Court, also noted that no question were put to the accused u/s 313, Cr. P.C. about the fake currency Notes, knowing and having reason to believe as fake.

We are not dealing with an appeal after final disposal of a case, but are deciding the question, whether, accused has to be granted bail or not?

Evidence has yet to be adduced, and it is only after evidence is led, that it could be said, whether the accused used the fake currency Notes, knowing or having reason to believe, as fake, and whether he had requisite mens rea or not? We cannot prejudge or anticipate that no such evidence is likely to come. The aforesaid case will, therefore, not be of any help to the accused.

Those who deal in fake currency Notes are the deadliest enemies of the National Economy and no leniency, should be shown to such offender.

Bail refused.

A copy of this order be sent, by the office post-haste to Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Gorakhpur, within two days for information and compliance, through District Judge, Gorakhpur.