RAJAPPAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal the challenge is against the judgment dated 27/11/2006 in S.C.No.770 of 2004 of the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track-I, Alappuzha by which the learned Judge found that the appellant/accused is guilty of the offence under Section 8(1) & (2) and 55(a) of the Abkari Act.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that on 13/01/2000 at 7.30 A.M. while PW.6 the Excise Circle Inspector, Excise Enforcement and Anti-Narcotic Special Squad, Alappuzha and Excise party were on patrol duty along Arattupuzha- Ramancherry Road in Arattupuzha Village, saw the accused coming from the opposite direction carrying a can of 5 litre capacity. According to the prosecution, on seeing the Excise party the accused became panick and tried to escape and on seeing the same, the excise party intercepted and the can held by the accused was checked by the Excise Circle Inspector in the presence of the independent witness. Later the content of the can was ascertained as arrack by smelling and tasting. Thus, according to the prosecution, the accused has committed the offence punishable under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. Consequently C.R.No.4 of 2000 for the offence under Section 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act has been registered in the Karthikappally Excise Range.

(3.) THE prosecution, in order to substantiate its allegation against the appellant, mainly relies upon the evidence of PW.1 and PW.6 the Excise officials involved in the detection of the crime. When PWs.1 and 6 were examined, they deposed in terms of the prosecution allegation. PW.1 is the then preventive officer attached to the Excise Enforcement and Anti-Narcotic Special Squad, Alappuzha and PW.6 is the Circle Inspector of Excise of the same Excise Enforcement and Anti-Narcotic Special Squad. According to these witnesses, on 13/01/2000 at about 07.30 a.m., while they were on patrol duty along Arattupuzha-Ramancherry, they saw the accused coming from the opposite side holding a can of 5 litre capacity and on seeing the excise party, the accused became panick and tried to escape from the place. But according to PWs.1 and 6 they intercepted and detained the accused and they checked the can which was found in the possession of the accused and on such inspection according to PW.6 and 1, they realized that the content of the can was full of arrack, by smelling and tasting. Thus, according to PWs.1 and 6 the accused was arrested and the contraband articles were seized and sample was also drawn from the contraband article. Thereafter, according to PWs.1 and 6 they reached the Excise range office at Karthikapally and the contraband article, the sample and the accused were entrusted with PW.3 the preventive officer attached to Karthikappally Excise Range. When PW.1 was examined, Ext.P1 seizure mahazar was marked and he had also identified M.O.1 can. PW.6 has also deposed in the same passion during his examination and identified P1 and MO.1.