ANITHA D/O.SARASU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track (ADHOC) No:II, Thiruvananthapuram, for offence punishable under section 8(1) r/w 8(2) of Abkari Act and he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay Rs.1,00,000.00 as fine and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. This appeal is directed against the said conviction and sentence.

(2.) THE gist of the prosecution case is that on 08.01.1998 at about 12 noon, PW3 - the Excise Inspector was on patrol duty along with PW2 - the Preventive Officer and other officials. When they reached the scene of occurrence, the appellant was found carrying a bundle on her head and on seeing the Excise party the appellant was found jittering. She was intercepted and the bundle carried by her was examined. It contained 100 plastic covers, each cover containing 100 ml of illicit liquor. She was arrested then and there. The contraband articles and the sack, in which the liquor packets were carried, were seized as per Ext.P1 mahazar, which was signed by PW2, PW3 and the independent witness including PW1. The accused and the contraband articles were produced before the Magistrate on the same day. Since there was no place for keeping the 100 packets, all the properties were returned to the Excise Officer for safe custody. Subsequently, a forwarding note was submitted to send the sample for chemical examination. The chemical analysis report (Ext.P5) shows that the sample contained 27.82% by volume of Ethyl Alcohol. After conducting investigation, charge sheet was laid against the accused.

(3.) SRI . K.P. Pradeep, appearing for the appellant as Legal Aid Counsel, has argued with vehemence that there are contradictions in the evidence given by PWs 1 to 3 regarding the place of arrest and also regarding the preparation of Ext.P1 mahazar. Even though there may be slight inconsistency regarding the place of arrest in the evidence given by PWs 2 and 3, Ext.P1 mahazar and also Ext.P6 - arrest memo would help the prosecution to contend that the accused was arrested at the time and place as noted in Exts. P1 and P6, since those documents are contemporaneous in nature.