Dharmendra Kumar @ Babloo vs State of Bihar

Ghanshyam Prasad, J.—Heard. The only grievance of the petitioner is about applicability of Section 255 of the Indian Penal Code, which is exclusively triable by the court of session. So far applicability of other Sections i.e. 258, 259, 260, 262, 420, 466, 468, 471 and 120B is concerned, they are triable by the Court of Magistrate and the petitioner has no grievance and he is ready to face the trial.

The admitted fact is that this petitioner and other accused persons were found involved in selling and purchasing of counterfeit stamps. A large number of counterfeit stamp were seized. Section. 255 of. the Indian Penal Code runs as follows:-

"255. Counterfeiting Government stamp.-Whoever counterfeits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting, any stamp issued by Government for the purpose of revenue, shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine."

From the language of Section 255 of the Indian Penal Code it is quite clear that the main ingredient of Section is that the accused'' must be found counterfeiting or knowingly involved in any part of the process of counterfeiting.

I have gone through the case diary as well as Fardbeyan and seizure list. Absolutely there is no allegation of counterfeiting of stamps. The simple allegation against this petitioner is of selling counterfeit stamps. Seizure list also does not show that any instrument was found to show that this petitioner was involved in counterfeiting stamp. Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is quite clear that Section 255 of the Indian Penal Code is not-applicable in this Case. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the impugned order is quashed only to the above extent. However, the trial under other Sections except Section 255 of the Indian Penal Code, shall continue.