The Kerala High Court recently acquitted a man who had been booked for possessing a counterfeit 100 dollar bill nearly four decades ago [Abdul Hakkim v State of Kerala].
Justice Johnson John ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove that the accused knew the note was fake or intended to use it as genuine.
The Court observed that the trial court had erred in treating statements given to the police as substantive evidence which did not prove that the accused had any knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the note or intended to use it as genuine.
The judge stressed that such essential ingredients were necessary to clearly establish conviction under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code (punishment for possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes).
"It is well settled that simply because a counterfeit note is seized from the possession of the accused, the offence under Section 489C IPC will not be attracted. To attract the offence under Section 489C IPC, the prosecution has to establish that the accused was in possession of forged or counterfeit note with the intention to use the same as genuine or attempted to use the same as genuine," the Court added.
The case arose 1987 when the police allegedly found Abdul Hakim in possession of a counterfeit 100 dollar bill near Thiruvananthapuram airport.
The prosecution claimed that he had attempted to exchange it as genuine one and was caught by a sub-inspector on patrol duty.
After trial, a sessions court at Kollam found him guilty and sentenced him to three years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹5,000 in 2009.
Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, Hakkim moved the High Court.
He contended that he was a headland worker at the airport and had received the note from a group of foreign tourists as payment for loading their luggage.
He stated that he was unaware that the note was counterfeit and a quarrel broke between him and other workers over the note after they saw that the note was torn from the middle and pasted and it was at that point that the police intervened and took him into custody.
The Court observed that the prosecution's evidence had several lapses with two key witnesses turning hostile as well as failure to examine the investigating officer, who had passed away by the time of trial.
The only supporting testimony that had come from the sub-inspector and the same was hearsay information gathered from bystanders at the scene, the Court noted.
Mere recovery of a counterfeit note did not automatically attract Section 489C IPC unless the prosecution proved that the accused had consciously been in possession of the fake currency and intend to use it as real money, the Court underscored.
The Court also held that the trial court had wrongly relied on the witness statements recorded by the police as substantive evidence and noted that no question was put to the accused under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure regarding his knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the note, a lapse that was fatal to the prosecution.
"A perusal of the questions put to the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., would show that no question indicating the conscious possession of the accused or his intention to use the note as genuine is seen put to the accused," the Court added.
Highlighting these gaps and shortcomings in the prosecution's case, the Court concluded that Hakkim was entitled to the benefit of doubt and set aside his conviction and sentence.
Advocate Thareeq Anver appeared for the accused.
Public Prosecutor Hasnamol NS represented the State.
[Read Judgment]