Poonam Agrawal vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors

Goutam Bhaduri, J

Heard.

The present petition is to quash the criminal case for which the charge-sheet has been filed under Sections 489 A, 489 C, 489 D and 489 E read with Section 34 IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that according to the police on 2nd of December, 2018 at 6 am in the morning the police started with the raid and it is the case of the police that they conducted the raid in the Flat at Rajat Complex of the petitioner and has recovered fake currency notes. He further submits that neither the currency notes were recovered from the petitioner nor any kind of raid was ever conducted, which would be evident from the final report as it contradicts the time and place as the seizure has been shown at 7:10 AM and the incident has been stated to be taken place at 9 AM, therefore, serious contradiction appears. He referred to the photographs, C.D. and Pen Drive along with the certificate of forensic expert, wherein it is stated that the C.D. & pen drive are original. He further submits that the C.D. & pen drive do not belong to the petitioner and the photographs and time would show that the raid was not conducted in the morning as it shows a different timing. He placed his reliance in the case of Shafhi Mohammad Versus State of Himachal Pradesh {(2018) 2 SCC 801} and Rajiv Thapar and others Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor {(2013) 3 SCC 330} and submits that in case C.C. TV footage which is not in control of the petitioner are produced, then it will have direct implication and can be looked into. He further submits that the entire investigation, therefore, is fake and the recovery of the fake currency notes too is fake.

To appreciate the argument of the petitioner at present it is difficult to connect the photographs so produced with the incident. The photographs only show presence of certain persons. Who they are, what were they doing is not clear. It is a matter of trial and the petitioner shall be at liberty to confront all these documents during the course of trial. Simply by looking the photographs no story can be attributed or developed in favour of the petitioner unless & until the witnesses say so and affirm the fact that the photographs and the raid are of the same time. There has to be live link between the production of the photographs and the incident of raid. Looking at the photographs which are filed before the Court, it cannot be inferred whether it was pertaining to the raid, prior to the incident or at the time of incident, nothing can be assumed. The petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all the questions during the course of trial which has been developed by the petitioner. At the threshold acceptance would amount to strangulate the prosecution in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The petition has no merit. It is accordingly dismissed.