In Brief
The appellant was accused of dealing in counterfeit currency (Sections 489B and 489C, IPC) based primarily on a confession by a co-accused who was absconding, and a statement made by the appellant to police. The High Court rejected his discharge petition. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that: (1) the appellant's police statement is inadmissible under Section 25 (confession to police) and Section 162 (statement during investigation); (2) the co-accused's confession alone cannot support framing charges without corroborating material; (3) no counterfeit currency was recovered from the appellant's residence; and (4) without other admissible evidence, no prima facie case exists. The appellant was discharged and freed from prosecution.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.