Sheikh Shehzad v. State of NCT of Delhi

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application is disposed of.

3. The present application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereafter „BNSS‟) has been filed on behalf of the applicant, seeking grant of regular bail in case arising out of FIR bearing no. 30/2021, registered at Police Station Special Cell (Lodhi Colony), Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter „IPC‟) and Section 15(1)(a)(iiia) read with Section 16 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereafter „UAPA‟).

4. Issue notice. Mr. Satinder Bawa,learned APP accepts notice of the present bail application on behalf of the State.

5. Brief facts of the case, as per prosecution, are that on 21.01.2021, information was received by the Special Cell that one Sheikh Shehzad (the present applicant), resident of Motihari, Bihar would come to Anand Vihar Railway Station to deliver one big consignment of Fake Indian Currency Notes (hereafter „FICN‟) to two persons namely Raja and Rehmhan, after procuring it from one Habibur Rehman, a resident of Malda, West Bengal. Pursuant to receipt of information, a raiding team was formed and a trap was laid near Anand Vihar Railway Station. The applicant Sheikh Shehzad arrived at the spot at about 10:25 AM, after which he was apprehended by the police and was searched. During search of his Pitthu bag, a white polythene was found, in which two bundles of currency notes of Rs.2,000/- denomination were found. Notes were counted and a total of 200 notes amounting to Rs.4,00,000/- were recovered from his possession. Thereafter, the present FIR was registered, and the applicant herein was arrested. One mobile phone was also recovered from his possession, which was kept for investigation purpose.

6. As per prosecution, the applicant Sheikh Shehzad disclosed during the course of investigation that he used to procure FICN from Habibur Rehman, and supply the same to various persons in Uttar Pradesh and Delhi including Raja, Rehman and Chandan. The applicant further disclosed that he could get the other persons arrested from different States and more FICN can be recovered from their possession. During investigation, the recovered FICN amount to Rs.4,00,000/- were deposited in Currency Note Press, Nasik Road, Government of India on 24.02.2021, for expert opinion. The report was received, in which it was opined that all the recovered notes were fake and out of 200 notes, 108 notes were high-quality counterfeit notes. Thereafter, teams from Northern Range were sent to Malda, West Bengal, in order to arrest Habibur Rehman, who came to be arrested on 19.06.2021 in the present case. As per prosecution, he admitted that he had supplied FICN of Rs.4,00,000/- to the applicant Sheikh Sehzad in January, 2021. In view of these allegations, Section 16 of UAPA was also added against the accused persons, and chargesheet was filed.

7. The learned Trial Court, vide order on charge dated 01.06.2022, held that prima facie, an offence under Sections 489B/489C of IPC and Section 16 of UAPA was made out against the applicant; however, the co-accused Habibur Rehman was discharged by the learned Trial Court.

8. The learned counsel appearing for the present accused/applicant argues that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, and he has been in judicial custody since 21.01.2021. It is contended that there is no public witness in this case and only police officials are the prosecution witness. It is argued that the seizure memos, arrest memo, personal search memo, etc. bears thumb impressions, however, nowhere it is mentioned as to whose thumb impression are those. It is also argued that the investigation agency did not request any independent public witness to join the proceedings at the spot, despite there being such occasions, and on a bare reading of testimony of PW-2 and PW-6, it becomes clear that the present case is concocted and the witnesses have been unable to point out the location from where the car/police vehicle was arranged. It is further submitted that co-accused Habibur Rahman has already been discharged from the case, and the case of the prosecution against the applicant is also concocted and based solely on the evidence of the police officials. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

9. Per contra, the learned APP for the State opposes the bail application, and argues that at this stage, this Court is not required to test the veracity of the prosecution witnesses. It is pointed out that two bundles containing 100 FICN each i.e. 200 FICN in total, amouting to a total of Rs.4,00,000/-, were recovered from the present applicant. It is stated that out of total 200 recovered FICN, 108 FICN are of very high quality, and that the factum of applicant being in possession of such a high quantity of high quality FICN points towards threat to the monetary stability of the nation and thus, offence under UAPA is also made out against the applicant. It is furthe submitted that applicant is also involved in another case i.e. FIR No. 40/2016, P.S Special Cell under Sections 489B/489C/34 of IPC is also pending against him.

10. This Court has heard arguments addressed on behalf of both the parties, and has perused the case file.

11. The gravamen of the allegations against the applicant are that he was involved in delivering a large consignment of FICN at Anand Vihar Railway Station, Delhi, and that he had obtained the said FICN from one Habibur Rehman, a resident of Malda, West Bengal, and was intending to supply the same to individuals in Uttar Pradesh and Delhi. The evidence against the applicant includes the recovery of 200 FICN, of Rs.2,000/- each, totaling Rs.4,00,000/-, from his possession at the time of his arrest. An expert report from the Currency Note Press confirmed that all the recovered notes were fake/counterfeit, and 108 out of 200 FICN were identified as high-quality counterfeit notes.

12. The applicant has been charged for offence under Sections 489B/489C of IPC and Section 16 of UAPA. Notably, Section 489B of IPC pertains to offence of selling, buying, receiving or trafficking in forged or counterfeit currency notes, and provides for punishment upto life imprisonment or imprisonment which may extend to ten years. Section 489C of IPC pertains to possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes, and provides for punishment upto seven years.

13. The learned Trial Court, in the impugned order, has also taken note of the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Tabrez Ahmed v. State (NCT of Delhi): 2021 SCC OnLine Del 4119, wherein it was observed as under, inter alia, with respect to offences under Section 489B and 489C of IPC: “6. Sections 489A, 489B, 489C, 489D and 489E were specially inserted by the legislature in the IPC to protect the economy of the country.

7. The Supreme Court in K. Hashim v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2005) 1 SCC 237, has explained the legislative intent of the provisions pertaining to counterfeiting of currency. Paragraph 46 to 50 of the said judgement reads as under:— “46. Sections 489-A to 489-E deal with various economic offences in respect of forged or counterfeit currency notes or banknotes. The object of the legislature in enacting these provisions is not only to protect the economy of the country but also to provide adequate protection to currency notes and banknotes.

47. Section 489-A not only deals with complete act of counterfeiting but also covers the case where the accused performs any part of the process of counterfeiting. Therefore, if the material shows that the accused knowingly performed any part of the process of counterfeiting, Section 489-A becomes applicable.