LALASAN S/O GANGADHARAN ELAVUSSERIL MUTTAR VILLAGE KUTTANAD TALUK Vs. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PPROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.207/1996 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Ramankary and the appellant in Crl.A.No.245/1997 on the file of the Sessions Court, Alappuzha. He was convicted under section 55(g) of the Abkari Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months by the trial court by judgment dated October 31, 1997. On appeal by the accused, the lower appellate court confirmed his conviction and sentence by judgment dated June 1, 2001. The accused has come up in revision challenging his conviction and sentence.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, as shaped in evidence before the trial court, in brief, is this:- PW3 is the then Preventive Officer of Kuttanad Excise Range. PW4 is the Excise Guard therein. On November 30, 1995 while they were on patrol duty, they got information that the accused was dealing with wash at Elavusseril house. After preparing search memo and sending it to the court, PWs.3 and 4 along with PWs.1 and 2 independent witnesses reached in front of the house bearing door No.5/168 of Muttar Panchayat. THEy saw the accused in front of the house. THEy searched the house and found six samovar, each containing 25 litres of wash, below a cot inside the house. MOs.1 and 2 are those samovars. THEy also found a mud pot near the samovar and a black jerry can smelling illicit liquor. After taking 700 ml. of wash as sample, the remaining portion was destroyed. THE accused was arrested on the spot and Ext.P1 mahazar and Ext.P2 search list were prepared. Accused was served with copies of the same and Ext.P2(a) is the endorsement to that effect. THE accused and the seized articles were taken to the office and PW5 the then Excise Inspector therein prepared the occurrence report and forwarded the articles to the trial court and sent a report for sending the sample for analysis. After obtaining the report and after completing the investigation PW5 laid the charge before the trial court.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.