State Of Kerala @APPELLANT @Ha Anwar @ Raveendran

N. Nagaresh, J

The State has filed this Criminal Revision Petition against the order dated 20.09.2021 in CMP No.1071/2020 in SC No.128/2011 of the Sessions Court, Kozhikode.

The Crime was investigated for offences under Sections 489B and 489C read with Section 34 IPC. The prosecution alleged that on 27.02.1999, at about 6 am, the 1st and 2nd accused and the respondent herein, who is the 3rd accused, were found inside room No.303 of Coronation Lodge and on search, 11 counterfeit currency notes of ₹500/-denomination and 21 currency notes of ₹100/- denomination were found in the possession of the 1st accused and 14 counterfeit currency notes of ₹500/- denomination and 11 currency notes of ₹100/- denomination were found in the possession of the 2nd accused. One counterfeit note of ₹500/- denomination was found kept in a book in which the name of the 3rd accused was written. When cognizance of the offence was taken, the 2nd accused and the respondent were absconding. The Magistrate's Court split up the case against the 2nd accused and the respondent, and refiled the same as CP No.34/2005.

Later, when the 2nd accused was produced, the Magistrate committed the case against him also to the Court of Session. The said cases were amalgamated with SC No.724/2005. Accused 1 and 2 were found guilty for the offence under Section 489C IPC and were convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years as per judgment dated 04.08.2008.

Later, the respondent in this Crl.R.P. (3rd accused) was arrested in the year 2011 and the case was committed to Sessions Court and numbered as SC No.128/2011. The respondent filed an application for discharge under Section 227 Cr.P.C.

The Sessions Court noted that though the SI searched the body of the respondent herein, nothing was seized from him. However, the respondent was implicated on the ground that one counterfeit currency note of ₹500/-denomination was found kept in a book lying in the cot in the room in which name of the respondent is written. The Sessions Court took a view that solely on the reason that he name of the accused was found written in the book, it cannot be said that the book was in his actual possession. Relying on the judgment in State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh [(1997) 4 SCC 39], the Sessions Court held that it is impossible to frame a charge against the respondent upon consideration of the records of the case. Consequently, the discharge petition filed by the respondent was allowed and the respondent was discharged from the offence alleged against him under Section 489C IPC.

The Public Prosecutor argued that the trial court erred in finding that the book in which one counterfeit currency note was alleged to have been seen was not produced before the court by the prosecution. Non-production of a material object or a document cannot form the basis for discharging an accused. The respondent was present in the room along with accused 1 and 2, from where counterfeit notes were seized. The room in which the accused were found was also taken in the name of the respondent. Therefore, the order dated 20.09.2021 of the Sessions Court, Kozhikode is liable to be set aside.

The respondent appeared in person and resisted the revision petition. The respondent submitted that while counterfeit currencies were in the possession of accused 1 and 2, no such currency was found in the possession of the respondent. The mere fact that one such currency note was found in a book in which the name of the petitioner was written cannot be a reason to assume that the said currency was possessed by the petitioner.

The respondent pointed out that there is no scene mahazar in respect of the seizure. The Guest Register maintained by the Lodge is also not seized. The respondent had filed a civil suit for compensation against officers and the revision petition has been filed only to take revenge on the respondent.

I have heard the learned Public Prosecutor representing the petitioner and the respondent in person.

The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with two others were found in room No.303 of Coronation Lodge and on search, a counterfeit currency note of ₹500/- denomination was found kept in a book in which the name of the respondent was written. It is an admitted fact that no counterfeit currency was found from the body of the respondent. The court below rightly found that merely because a counterfeit currency note was found kept in a book in which the name of the respondent was written, it cannot be held that he is in possession of the currency. I do not find any illegality in the conclusion of the Sessions Court.

The argument of the Public Prosecutor is that the currency was found from a room of Coronation Lodge which was taken in the name of the respondent. As the room was given to the respondent and the counterfeit currency was found from the room, it should be presumed that the currency was in possession of the respondent.

It is to be noted that there is no seizure mahazar and the prosecution has not produced the relevant Guest Register of the Coronation Lodge in order to establish a prima facie case that the counterfeit currency was found in a room which was in the possession of the respondent.

In such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order dated 20.09.2021 of the Sessions Court, Kozhikode discharging the respondent. The Criminal Revision Petition therefore fails and it is consequently dismissed.