ARIFFA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE second accused, a lady in S.C.No.991/2003 of the court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court -I, Thiruvananthapuram is the appellant and in this appeal, she challenges her conviction and sentence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act imposed vide judgment dated 17.12.2011 in the above Sessions Case.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that the accused, two in number, at about 10 p.m. on 26.7.2001 were found in possession of 140 litres of spirit in 4 plastic cannas against the provisions of the Abkari Act in their house Varuvilakam veedu bearing No.KP2/535 in Upaniyoor Desom. Thus, according to the prosecution, the accused have committed the offences punishable under Section 55(a) and (i) of the Kerala Abkari Act and with the above allegation, Crime No.193 of 2001 was registered in the Nemom Police Station.

(3.) ON the appearance of the appellant/accused in the trial court, a formal charge was framed against her for the offence punishable under Section 55(a) and (i) of the Kerala Abkari Act. When the same was read over and explained to the accused, she denied the same and pleaded not guilty. Consequently, the prosecution has examined Pws.1 to 6 and produced Exts.P1 to P8 documents to prove its allegation. MO1 series white cannas four in numbers are also identified an marked as material objects. No evidence either oral or documentary was produced from the side of the defence. The trial court finally found that the prosecution has succeeded to prove the case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and accordingly, found that the appellant/the second accused is guilty for the offence punishable under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. Accordingly, he is convicted therein. On such conviction, the appellant/accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 18 months and to pay fine of Rs.1 lakh and in default, she is directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. Set off is allowed. Challenging the above finding, conviction and sentence, the appellant/second accused preferred this appeal.