1 2025:CGHC:35762 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No.734 of 2005 Raju Prasad S/o Panna Lal Mishra Aged About 21 Years R/o House Of Bhaiya Lal Karma Chok, Police Station Guriyari, District Raipur, (C.G.) ... Appellant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P/S Ganj District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Appellant : Shri Ashok Dixit, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Anuradha Jain, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Judgment on Board 24.07.2025 1. The present Appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 24.06.2005 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2025.07.25 10:54:02 +0530 2 Raipur in Sessions Trial No.77/2005 whereby, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the Appellant under Sections 489-B and 489-C/34 IPC and sentenced him to undergo RI for seven years with fine of Rs.5,000/- plus usual default stipulation. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Summarized facts of the case of the prosecution are that on 02.01.2005 at about 22.15 hrs, the present Appellant went to the liquor shop situated at Ganjpara, Raipur to purchase liquor and rendered a note of Rs.100/- to salesman Rajendra Dubey (PW-3) to whom, the said note appeared to be counterfeit, therefore, he returned the same to the Appellant and informed about the said fact to Police Inspector Rajeev Sharma (PW-4) and ASI Ramesh Kumar Majhi (PW-2). Upon searching the Appellant, the police recovered 27 counterfeit notes, each of ₹100 denomination which were seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P-6). On interrogation, the Appellant has disclosed the fact that the said notes were counterfeit and had been given to him by co-accused Anand Kumar Sharma (who has preferred a separate Appeal i.e. Cr.A No.537/2005 and during pendency of the said Appeal, he died on 01.12.2018, therefore, the Appeal against him has been dismissed as abated vide order dated 30.06.2025). The police have registered FIR (Ex.P-7) at PS Ganj, District Raipur and the seized notes were also sent for examination to the Indian Reserve Bank, 3 Nagpur from where, report (Ex.P-9) was received whereby, it was confirmed that the notes (Articles A-1 to 27) were counterfeit. 3. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed and after committal, the case was received for trial and during trial, the Appellant has abjured his guilt and claimed to be tried. 4. After evaluation of evidence, the trial Court has convicted the Appellant by the impugned judgment as mentioned in para-1 of this judgment. Hence, this Appeal. 5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that he is not pressing this Appeal so far as it relates to the conviction part of the impugned judgment and confines his arguments to the sentence part thereof only. According to him, the incident took place in the year 2005 i.e. 20 years ago and at the relevant point of time, the Appellant was aged 21 years. He further submits that the Appellant was in jail since 03.01.2005 and thereafter, on 04.09.2005, this Court has suspended the jail sentence awarded to him, thereby, he has already remained in jail for a considerable period and no useful purpose would be served in sending him back to jail. He lastly submits that it would be in the interest of justice if the sentence imposed on him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. 4 6. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State supported the judgment impugned and opposed the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the Appellant. 7. Heard learned Counsel for both the parties, perused the material available on record as also gone through the judgment under challenge carefully. 8. From the evidence of Rajendra Dubey (PW-3), Rajeev Sharma (PW-4), Inspector and Ramesh Kumar Majhi (PW-2), Assistant Sub-Inspector, it is explicit that the Appellant has rendered a counterfeit note to Rajendra Dubey (PW-3) at the liquor shop and the evidence of the said witness reveals that the notes were apparently counterfeit, therefore, in view of above, a presumption of knowledge can be gathered, which has been observed in the matter of M. Mammuti vs. State of Karnataka reported in AIR (1979) SC 1705 wherein, it has been held that where it is not shown that the Appellant had knowledge or reason to believe that the notes were counterfeit, the conviction under Sections 489-B and 489-C IPC is not proper. It was further held therein that presumption of knowledge from mere possession can only be drawn if the notes were apparently counterfeit. 9. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the case law cited above, this Court does not find any illegality or infirmity in the finding recorded by the trial Court as 5 regards conviction of the Appellant under Sections 489-B and 489- C IPC, which is hereby affirmed. 10. As regards the sentence awarded, keeping in view the fact that the Appellant who, at the relevant point of time, was a young man aged about 21 years and also considering the fact that the offence was committed 20 years ago and he has already remained in jail for a considerable period, this Court is of the opinion that justice would be served if the sentence awarded to him is reduced to the period already undergone by him. Ordered accordingly. However, fine amount imposed on the Appellant shall remain in tact. 11. Consequently, the Appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above. The Appellant is reported to be on bail. He need not surrender. The bail bonds furnished by the Appellant shall remain in operation for a period of 6 months from today in view of the provisions contained under Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) JUDGE Priya