' This appeal is directed under section 417, Cr.P.C. Against the order of Sessions Judge, Lakki dated 17-7-1995 whereby the accused/respondents were acquitted of the charge under section 489-C, P.P.C.
2. Brief facts of the case are that Amir Ahmad Khan, A.S.I., was entrusted with the investigation of a complaint under section 468/406/417/427/ 419/420, P.P.C. Lodged by Hamdullah Jan, respondent No,2 herein, against Shah Nawaz, respondent No,1 . During the inquiry, the Investigating Officer was informed that both the said persons have kept forged counterfeit currency notes worth Rs,50,000.
During the house-search of Shah Nawaz, a sum of Rs,49,400 of Rs,100 denomination counterfeit notes were found which were taken into possession by the police. The matter was reported by the said A.S.I. Through a Murasila which culminated in registration of the case vide F.I.R. No, 313, dated 1- 8-1992 of Police Station Naurang under section 489-C, P.P.C.
3. Both the accused were put to trial and after its conclusion they were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge on 17-7-1995. Hence this appeal.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the State at great length and perused the record thoroughly.
5. The only allegation in the F.I.R. And the prosecution evidence against the accused-respondents is that they were found in possession of forged currency notes. This allegation, per se, is not sufficient to sustain conviction under section 489-C, P.P.C. The prosecution was bound to establish that the accused had kept the forged currency notes in their possession knowing or having reasons to believe that the same to be forged or counterfeit and intended to use them as genuine, or the same might be used as genuine. In the absence of any proof to this effect, the essential ingredients of the offence have not been proved. In this respect, reliance can be placed on PLD 1961 (W.P) Kar.
342, 1971 PCr.LJ 537 and 1988 PCr.LJ 1555.
6. In order to prove a case within the purview of section 489-C, P.P.C., it is not only sufficient to prove that the accused were in possession of the forged notes, but it should be further established (i) that at the time of its possession he knew the notes to be forged, or had reasons to believe it to be so, (b) or intending to use the same as genuine or, (c) that it may be used as genuine. The onus lies on the prosecution to prove the circumstances that the accused had the intention to foist the notes on the public.
7. There is nothing on the file to support the prosecution on this count. The Courts are reluctant to interfere into an order of acquittal primarily for the reason that after his acquittal, an accused earns double presumption of innocence which can only be rebutted if the order of acquittal, on the face of it, appears to be perverse, arbitrary or illegal. Reference can be made to 1995 PCr.LJ 408.
8. In this view of the matter finding no illegality in the order of the trial Court, this appeal being devoid of any substance does not merit acceptance which is accordingly dismissed in limine.