Puran Chand vs State of Haryana

Harbans Singh Rai, J.

Puran Chand has been convicted under section 489 B, Indian, Penal Code and sentenced to one year''s rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/ in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months by the order of the Addl. Session Judge, Kurukshetra dated April 9, 1985. He has challenged has conviction and sentence through the present appeal.

The prosecution story is, what there is a firm at Kaithal in the name and style of M/s. Jai Narain Dass Ram Kumar. The appellant is an employee of that firm. On December 13, 1983, the appellant went to State of India, Talai Bazar, Kaithal, with a sum of Rs. 66707.50 of containing in a number of packets and for that amount be had to purchase two drafts on behalf of his employer firm. He, presented these packets of money to shri Ashok Kumar, P.W.who was then working as Cashier at the counter. Ashok Kumar P.W. was posted as a Cash Officer in the Bank. He counted the currency notes of one of the packets, While counting he suspected one currency note of the denomination of Rs. 100/. to be of inferior quality as the printing was rough and gold line missing. He suspected the currency note to be a forged one. He went to Shri D. K. Jain, P.W. who was Branch Manager of the Bank and showed him the packets of the currency notes containing the suspected note. The packet was untied and that note was taken out of it. But before that, Ram Kumar and Vir Bhan, two partners of the employer firm of the appellant had been summoned to the Bank by the Branch Manager and the packet was untied in their presence. Ram Kumar gave another currency note of the denomination of Rs. 100/ to the Bank Manager and got the required drafts prepared. The suspected note which was taken out of that packet is Exhibit P. 1.

The Bank Manager range up the police and also sent them a letter Exhibit PB for registration of the case. On receipt of letter Exhibit PB S.I. Mange Ram recorded the first information report and started investigation. The investigation was entrusted to Tahil Singh S.I. letter on. He went to the Bank premises and recorded the statements of the December 16, 1983, S. 1. Tabil Singh took into possession the said note Exhibit P. 1 from the Bank Manager vide recovery Memo. Exhibit P. A. On return to the Police Station, he made over the note Exhibit P1 to the Moharrir Head Constable, who in. turn sent the note to the Bank Note Press Devas. The opinion of the Bank Note Press was that the note was forged. After completing the investigation, the appellant was challaned, convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge.

The prosecution, in support of its case, examined Surinder Pal Gaba, Accountant of the Bank in question in whose presence the police had taken the note Exhibit P. 1 into possession from Shri D.K. Jain, Branch Manager. D. K. Jain P.W. 2 corroborated the story given by Ashok Kumar, P.W.3, who had detected the currency note to be forged during the counting. Ashok Kumar gave the prosecution version as to how the appellant came with the money and how during counting he had suspected the note and placed it before the Branch Manager. S.I. Tahil Singh is the investigating officer.

When examined under section 313, Cr.P.C. appellant Puran Chand admitted that he bad gone to the State Bank of India, Talai Bazar, Kaithal, on December 13, 1983 and had presented several packets of money amounting to Rs. 66707.50 for preparation of drafts. However, he denied the presentation of any forged currency note pleading innocence.

Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code, makes it penal to sell, buy or receive or otherwise traffic in any forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank note knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit. It is thus clear that before a person can be convicted for this offence it has to be established that he was aware of the forged or counterfeit nature of the currency note which he has offered for sale or exchange. In the present case, besides the fact that the accused has, presented this note along with other currency notes at the State Bank of India for purchase of draft, there is no material to come to the conclusion that he was aware that it was not a genuine one. It is not the prosecution case that the currency note was of such a nature that a mere look at it would convince anybody that it was a counterfeit. No presumption can be drawn from mere possession of the note that the appellant knew that was a counterfeit. In this case, the prosecution has not led any evidence to prove that the appellant knew or had reason to believe that the currency note was counterfeit. It is also in the prosecution evidence that the appellant used to deal with the State Bank of India earlier also and only one note was found to be suspicious. As there was no evidence led by the prosecution to prove that the appellant knew that the note was counterfeit, so no specific question was put to him when he was examined under section 313, Cr.P.C. in order to find out whether he knew that the note was of such a nature. In the absence of any evidence to prove this and the fact that the appellant was not even questioned under section 313 Cr.P.C. on this aspect of the case. It is not possible to hold that the appellant knew or had reason to believe that the note was counterfeit the circumstances, it is impossible to sustain the conviction of the appellant.

For the reasons given above, the appeal is allowed, the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant is set aside and he is acquitted of all the charges framed against him.