BABU. M. JOHN, S/O. SAMUEL JOHN, KALLUKUZHIYIL VEEDU, ARUNOOTTIMANGALAM MURI MAVELIKKARA Vs. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AND THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, MAVELIKKARA EXCISE OFFICE, MAVELIKKARA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge Fast Track (Adhoc -I), Alappuzha for offence punishable under Sec. 8(2) of the Abkari Act. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year and to pay Rs. 1 lakh as fine, in default whereof, to undergo S.I. for one year.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 27.10.1999 at about 5.30 PM while PW1, the Preventive Officer and other excise officials were on patrol duty, the accused was found carrying a bottle containing 750ml of liquid which when smelt and tasted found to be contraband arrack. From that bottle 200ml was taken as sample in a bottle of 375ml. The accused was arrested then and there Arrest memo was prepared. The properties were seized as per the seizure mahazar. The accused and properties were produced before the Excise Inspector (PW2). After conducting investigation, charge sheet was laid against the appellant.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submits that there is no legal evidence to show the arrest of the accused and seizure of MO1 from his possession. The evidence given by DW1 should have been given due weight by the court below. Simply because she happened to be the wife of the accused, she should not have been disbelieved by the courts below. The fact that PW3 and PW4, the independent witnesses did not support the prosecution also should have been duly considered by the court below to hold that the prosecution case is untrue.