Counterfeit currency : Absence of conscious possession and intention to use as genuine is fatal to prosecution

Lack of Evidence and Procedural Flaws Grant Abdul Hakkim Benefit of Doubt in 1987 Dollar Bill Incident

In a significant judgment, the Kerala High Court has overturned the conviction of Abdul Hakkim, accused of possessing counterfeit currency with intent to use it as genuine, under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The judgment, delivered by Justice Johnson John, highlights substantial procedural lapses and insufficient evidence that led to the acquittal of Hakkim, who had been sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Kollam.

The case dates back to August 4, 1987, when Abdul Hakkim was accused of possessing a counterfeit 100 Dollar bill, allegedly attempting to exchange it near Thiruvananthapuram airport. The trial court had sentenced Hakkim based on the testimony of the Sub Inspector of Valiyathura Police Station and other evidence presented by the prosecution.

However, upon appeal, the High Court found critical errors in the trial proceedings. The court noted the failure to put incriminating questions to the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), which is essential for establishing the accused's knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the currency and his intention to use it as genuine. The absence of such questioning was deemed fatal to the prosecution's case, thus entitling Hakkim to the benefit of doubt.

Further scrutiny revealed that the trial court had improperly relied on case diary statements as substantive evidence, in violation of Section 162 of the Cr.P.C. This section explicitly bars the use of police statements as substantive evidence, allowing them only for contradiction purposes. The High Court criticized the trial court for using these statements to support the prosecution, disregarding established legal precedents.

The judgment also highlighted that possession alone does not suffice for conviction under Section 489C IPC; the prosecution must prove the accused's intention to use the counterfeit note as genuine, which was lacking in this case. Additionally, the High Court observed procedural discrepancies in the investigation, including the failure to examine key witnesses such as the bank manager who reportedly verified the currency's authenticity.

The court concluded that the prosecution did not discharge its evidential burden effectively, as suggestions made in cross-examination cannot fill the gaps in the prosecution's evidence. With the only corroborating witness being the Sub Inspector whose testimony was based on hearsay, the court ruled in favor of the appellant, granting him acquittal.

The judgment underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and the evidential standards necessary for upholding a conviction. It serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in ensuring justice by meticulously examining the adherence to legal norms and the substantive evidence presented during trials.

The acquittal of Abdul Hakkim, after decades of legal battle, marks a pivotal moment reflecting the judiciary's commitment to upholding fair trial standards and delivering justice based on concrete evidence.

Bottom Line:

Section 489C IPC requires prosecution to establish possession of counterfeit currency note with knowledge or reason to believe it is counterfeit and intention to use it as genuine - Absence of incriminating questions under Section 313 Cr.P.C regarding accused's conscious possession and intention to use counterfeit note as genuine is fatal to prosecution case.

Statutory provision(s): Section 489C IPC, Section 313 Cr.P.C, Section 162 Cr.P.C, Section 161 Cr.P.C, Section 145 Evidence Act.

Abdul Hakkim v. State of Kerala, (Kerala) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2805841