In the High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad Dated This the 16Th Day of July 2013 Before the Hon'ble Mr. Justice N

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 16 TH DAY OF JULY 2013 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.497/2008 C/W CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos.545/2008 & 2520/2008 CRL.A.No.497/2008 BETWEEN: Basappa @ Basavaraj Mallikarjun Mavinkatti Aged about 30 years, Occ: Agriculture R/o. Koldur, Taluk & District: Belgaum …Appellant (By Sri G.M.Bhat, Advocate for Sri Bahubali A.Danawade, Advocate) AND: The State of Karnataka By Hirebagewadi Police, Belgaum. …Respondent (By Sri K.S.Patil, HCGP) CRL.A.No.545/2008 BETWEEN: Suresh Basappa Bannakki Aged about 29 years Occ: Completed B.Com and working as lecturer in KLE Society’s College at Athani, R/o. Nesargi, Taluk: Bailhongal District: Belgaum. …Appellant (By Sri G.M.Bhat, Advocate for Sri Bahubali A.Danawade, Advocate) 2 AND: The State of Karnataka By Hirebagewadi Police, Belgaum. ….Respondent (By Sri K.S.Patil, HCGP) Crl.A.No.2520/2008 BETWEEN: Sri Yallappa S/o. Mallappa Harijan @ Madar Age: 45 years, R/o. Hosakoti Taluk: Bailhongal, District: Belgaum. …Appellant (By Sri Santosh B.Malagoudar, Advocate) AND: The State of Karnataka By Hirebagewadi Police Belgaum Rep. by State Public Prosecutor Circuit Bench Building, Dharwad. … Respondent (By Sri K.S.Patil, HCGP) Crl.A.Nos.2520/2008, 497/2008 & 545/2008 are filed by accused 2 to 4 under section 374(2) Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the judgment dated 08.04.2008 passed in S.C.No.262/2006, on the file of Presiding Officer, FTC-II & Addl.Sessions Judge at Belgaum & etc. These appeals coming on for final hearing this day, the court delivered the following: 3 J U D G M E N T Criminal Appeal Nos.2520/2008, 497/2008 & 545/2008 are filed by accused 2 to 4 in S.C.No.262/2006, on the file of Presiding Officer, FTC-II & Addl.Sessions Judge at Belgaum, respectively. Accused 2 to 4 along with accused No.1 were tried, convicted and sentenced for offences punishable under sections 489A, 489B & 489C IPC. Accused No.1 has not filed appeal against impugned judgment of conviction. 2. I have heard Sri Santosh B.Malagoudar, learned counsel for accused No.2, Sri G.M.Bhat, learned counsel for accused 3 & 4 and Sri K.S.Patil, learned HCGP for State. 3. In brief, the case of prosecution is as follows:- On 22.06.2006 at about 12 in the noon, PW15- Rajshekhar B.Mestri, PSI of Hirebagewadi Police Station received information from PW9-Basalinga C.Wali that one person had come to his arrack shop to circulate counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination as genuine 4 currency notes and that person also offered 11 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination in exchange of Rs.500/- genuine currency notes. Therefore, PW15- Rajshekhar B.Mestri, PW12-Maruti B.Chinchewadi & PW13- Balappa S.Hadaginal proceeded to the arrack shop of PW9. PW15 seized two counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination from possession of PW9. On enquiry, PW9 showed accused No.1, who was near the arrack shop adjacent to Hirebagewadi-Bailhongal Bus Stop. Accused No.1 was apprehended by PW12 & PW13. PW15 searched the person of accused No.1 and found 151 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination. PW15 secured panchas and seized 151 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination under panchnama as per Ex.P.1. PW15 brought accused No.1 to Hirebagewadi Police Station and registered Crime No.76/2006 and subjected seized property to property form and despatched first information report. PW15 handed over further investigation to PW17- Guddappa M.Desur, who was the then Police Inspector of 5 Hirebagewadi Police Station. PW17 during further investigation found involvement of accused 2 to 4 and also learnt that accused 2 to 4 were arrested in connection with Crime No.89/2006, registered by APMC Police Station at Belgaum and they were in custody. PW17 secured accused 2 to 4 under body warrants and interrogated them. The voluntary statement given by accused No.2 led to recovery of 10 counterfeit currency notes from the house of accused No.2. The voluntary statement given by accused No.3 led to recovery of 5 counterfeit currency notes from the house of accused No.3. The voluntary statement given by accused No.4 did not led to any recovery. PW17 learnt that an Epson Stylus CX1500v All-in-one Printer used for printing counterfeit currency notes and certain number of counterfeit currency notes had been seized from the shop of accused No.4 in his shopping complex of Bailhongal in Crime No.89/2006, registered by APMC Police at Belgaum. 4. The counterfeit currency notes had been sent to Currency Note Press at Nasik for expert opinion. The expert 6 namely Sri M.K.Srivastava, Assistant Works Manager, Gazetted Officer, Class-I, for General Manager, Currency Note Press, Nasik Road (M.S.) furnished his opinion as per Ex.P.18, wherein it is stated that counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination, in all 177 are forged notes. The expert has given reasons for arriving at such conclusion. The defence has not controverted the contents of Ex.P.18. It is not the case of defence that counterfeit currency notes produced by prosecution are genuine currency notes. 5. The learned trial Judge, without scrutiny of investigation records has framed charges against accused 1 to 4 for offences punishable under sections 489A, 489B & 489C r/w 34 IPC. The investigation records do not reveal material to charge accused 1 to 3 of an offence punishable under section 489A IPC. 6. In order to bring home the guilt of accused, prosecution examined PW1 to PW17 and relied upon documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.18 and material objects 7 marked as M.O.1 to M.O.12. The material objects consist of counterfeit currency notes and one Epson Stylus CX1500v All-in-one Printer. 7. PW1 to PW11 did not support the case of prosecution. They were treated as hostile witnesses and they were subjected to cross-examination by learned Public Prosecutor. Even during cross-examination, they have stuck to their versions given in examination-in-chief. PW9, who according to the case of prosecution had given information to police about circulation of counterfeit currency notes by accused No.1, did not support the case of prosecution. PW9 was also declared as a hostile witness and he was cross-examined by learned Public Prosecutor. Even during cross-examination, PW9 has stuck to his version given in examination-in-chief. PW10 & PW11 have not supported the case of prosecution. 8. At this juncture, it is relevant to state that PW10- Basavaraj N.Hanchinmani was examined to prove that PW9 8 had gone to a telephone booth to inform police about circulation of counterfeit currency notes by accused No.1. 9. PW11-Shivanand Irappa Navi was running a barber shop, situate near the arrack shop where PW9 was working. PW11 has not supported the case of prosecution. 10. PW14-Hanamanth D.Kelaginmani was examined to prove recovery of counterfeit currency notes from the house of accused No.2. PW14 has not supported the case of prosecution. 11. Therefore, prosecution has relied on the evidence of PW12-Maruti B.Chinchewadi, the then ASI of Hirebagewadi Police Station, PW13-Balappa, the then Police Constable of Hirebagewadi Police Station, PW15-Rajshekhar Basavanneppa Mestri, the then PSI of Hirebagewadi Police Station, PW16-Shrinivas, the then Police Inspector of Camp Police Station (APMC Police Station was coming under the jurisdiction of PW16) and PW17-Guddappa, the then Police Inspector of Hirebagewadi Police Station. 9 12. The evidence of PW12 regarding apprehension of accused No.1 and seizure of 151 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination from his possession and seizure of 10 counterfeit currency notes from PW9 has not been seriously controverted. During cross-examination of PW12 by learned counsel for accused No.1, nothing was elicited to discredit his evidence. The cross-examination of PW12 is mere suggestive cross-examination. 13. The evidence of PW13-Balappa is more or less similar to the evidence of PW12. During cross-examination of PW13, apart from eliciting that counterfeit currency notes seized by Investigating Officer were bearing similar serial numbers, who in fact supported the case of prosecution, nothing has been elicited to discredit the evidence of PW13. 10 14. As already stated, PW15 is the PSI of Hirebagewadi Police Station. On receipt of information, he proceeded to the place and apprehended accused No.1 and seized 151 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination from possession of accused No.1 and 11 counterfeit currency notes from possession of PW9. PW15 has deposed about preparation of first information report and registration of case against accused No.1. As already stated, accused No.1 has challenged the impugned judgment. The impugned judgment as it relates to accused No.1 has attained finality. Therefore, it is necessary to appreciate incriminating evidence adduced by the prosecution against accused 2 to 4. 15. At the out set, it is necessary to state that accused 2 & 3 were not found in physical possession of counterfeit currency notes. It is the case of prosecution that voluntary statement given by accused No.2 led to recovery of 10 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination from the house of accused No.2 in Harijan Keri of Hoskoti village, 11 Bailhongal Taluk. The voluntary statement given by accused No.3 led to recovery of 5 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination from his house in Koldur Oni.

Load more