Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Smt. Jahanurbir Gayasuddin Shaikh, was convicted by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Gr. Mumbai, for offences under Sections 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and fine for each offence. The case arose from an incident on 2 September 2011, when the appellant allegedly purchased utensils worth Rs. 90 from Ramsurat Kewat (PW1) using a Rs. 1000 counterfeit note. The next day, Kewat discovered the note was counterfeit at a bank and, along with other shopkeepers who claimed to have received similar notes from the appellant, handed her over to the police. The appellant was arrested on 4 September 2011, and a report from the Currency Note Press, Nashik confirmed the notes were counterfeit. At trial, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses, including the complainant, bank cashier, other shopkeepers, and investigating officers. The trial court convicted the appellant, leading to this appeal. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution failed to prove that the appellant knew or had reason to believe the notes were counterfeit. The court noted that the appellant was a poor labourer, the notes were of small denomination, and there was no evidence of her having any connection to counterfeiting or any suspicious behavior. The court held that the essential ingredient of mens rea was not established, and the conviction could not be sustained. The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed that the appellant be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Counterfeit Currency - Sections 489B and 489C Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Knowledge and Intent - The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knew or had reason to believe the currency notes were counterfeit at the time of possession or use. Mere possession or use of counterfeit notes, without evidence of knowledge, does not constitute the offence. The court held that the prosecution failed to establish the essential ingredient of mens rea, as the appellant was a poor labourer and the notes were of small denomination, and there was no evidence that she knew they were fake. (Paras 5-8) B) Evidence Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Burden of Proof - In cases under Sections 489B and 489C IPC, the burden lies on the prosecution to prove the accused's guilty knowledge. The court held that the circumstances, such as the appellant being a daily wage labourer and the notes being of small value, did not lead to an inference of knowledge. The conviction was set aside. (Paras 5-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for using as genuine and possessing counterfeit currency notes is sustainable in the absence of proof that she knew or had reason to believe the notes were counterfeit.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of all charges. Bail bonds cancelled. Appellant to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case.
Law Points
- Presumption of innocence
- Burden of proof on prosecution
- Knowledge and intent essential for offences under Sections 489B and 489C IPC
- Circumstantial evidence insufficient without direct proof of mens rea
