B. KRISHNAPPA GOWDA Vs. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are concurrent findings of Authorised Officer and learned Sessions Judge that vehicle of petitioner viz Mini Lorry bearing No.KA -18/3439 was used for transportation of arrack packets without permit. The vehicle was intercepted at about 12.40 a.m., during midnight of 17.12.2005. The Authorised Officer on consideration of evidence of PW1 to PW4 has recorded a finding that an offence under the Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 (for short, 'the Act') has been committed and vehicle is liable for confiscation. In the appeal, the learned Sessions Judge on re -appreciation of evidence has confirmed the order of Authorised Officer. Therefore, petitioner is before this court.

(2.) THE law is fairly well settled that this court while exercising revisional jurisdiction under section 401 Cr.P.C., does not sit as a court of second appeal. This court can interfere with the impugned judgment if the courts below have committed glaring errors in appreciation of evidence or errors of law resulting manifest injustice to petitioner. 

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned HCGP for State.