DINESAN, S/O KUNHIKANNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision petitioner is the accused in C.C. No. 1316 of 1996 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vadakara and the appellant in Crl.A.No.324 of 1999 on the file of the Court of the Addl. District and Sessions Judge Fast Track Court (Adhoc- II), Kozhikode. In this appeal he challenges the judgment of the learned Magistrate dated May 26, 1999 convicting the accused under section 58 of the Abkari Act and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months which was modified by the learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated July 18, 2002 to simple imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, as unfolded in evidence before the trial court, in brief, is this:- PW4 is the then Preventive Officer of Vadakara Excise Range. On September 30, 1995 at about 6.15 p.m. while he along with other Excise officials were on patrol duty they found the accused carrying MO1 can in his hand and on examination it was found that the can contained five litres of illicit arrack. They arrested the accused, seized the can MO1 and took the sample. PW4 prepared mahazar Ext.P1. He produced the accused before the Excise Range Office, Vadakara. PW3 the then Excise Range Officer, Vadakara Excise Range Office registered the case against him and produced him before the trial court. After conducting investigation, PW3 filed the charge before the committal court.

(3.) The accused on appearance before the trial court pleaded not guilty to a charge under section 58 of the Abkari Act. PWs.1 to 4 were examined and Exts.P1 and P2 and MOI were marked on the side of the prosecution. When questioned under section 313 Cr.P.C. by the learned Magistrate, the accused denied the entire incident. No defence evidence was adduced.