Counsel for Respondent(s) vs R.N. Shukla
Case Details
11. In the aforesaid background of the case, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial Court committed error of fact and law both in not considering the facts of the case in the light of ht evidence produced before it and as such interference of this Court is required in the matter and appellants are liable to be acquitted.
12. Sri Arun Kumar, learned AGA appearing for the State submitted that judgment of the trial court is justified as prosecution has established its case as indicated in the FIR.
13. Upon due consideration of submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the evidence available on record, this Court finds that the trial Court has not committed any irregularity or illegality in passing the judgment under appeal dated 21.12.2010. It is for the following reason(s)- (i) The recovery of fake currency from the possession of the accused-appellant and documentary evidence, indicated above, were proved before the trial Court by the prosecution witnesses namely S.I. Shyambabu Shukla, S.I. Ramesh Chandra Pandey, Incharge Police Station-Jagdish Prasad Singh, S.I. Ahmad Jalal Zaidi and Constable Jagannath Swami. (ii) The fact that the currency recovered from the possession of the accused-appellants was fake was established/proved by providing the expert report (Ext. Ka-8).
14. For the reason(s) aforesaid, the instant appeal is dismissed.
15. Copy of this judgment and trial Court record be sent back to the Court concerned. November 14, 2025 Vinay/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
11. In the aforesaid background of the case, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the trial Court committed error of fact and law both in not considering the facts of the case in the light of ht evidence produced before it and as such interference of this Court is required in the matter and appellants are liable to be acquitted.
12. Sri Arun Kumar, learned AGA appearing for the State submitted that judgment of the trial court is justified as prosecution has established its case as indicated in the FIR.
13. Upon due consideration of submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the evidence available on record, this Court finds that the trial Court has not committed any irregularity or illegality in passing the judgment under appeal dated 21.12.2010. It is for the following reason(s)- (i) The recovery of fake currency from the possession of the accused-appellant and documentary evidence, indicated above, were proved before the trial Court by the prosecution witnesses namely S.I. Shyambabu Shukla, S.I. Ramesh Chandra Pandey, Incharge Police Station-Jagdish Prasad Singh, S.I. Ahmad Jalal Zaidi and Constable Jagannath Swami. (ii) The fact that the currency recovered from the possession of the accused-appellants was fake was established/proved by providing the expert report (Ext. Ka-8).
14. For the reason(s) aforesaid, the instant appeal is dismissed.
15. Copy of this judgment and trial Court record be sent back to the Court concerned. November 14, 2025 Vinay/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench