RAVEENDRAN S/O. NARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused in S.C.No.305 of 2001 of the Additional Sessions Court(Adhoc-I), Pathanamthitta, who stands convicted under Section 8 of the Abkari Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lakh, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for two more months, has come up in appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that, on 1.6.1998 at 11.45 a.m., while the Preventive Officer attached to the Excise Range Office, Adoor and party were on patrol duty, they received a reliable information that the appellant had stored arrack in his house. The Excise party went over there and searched the house in the presence of the accused and found a can containing 7 litres of arrack from beneath the kitchen slab of the house. The same was seized by PW3 through Ext.P1 mahazar. Ext.P3 is the search list. The appellant was placed under arrest through Ext.P4 arrest memo. The appellant and the material objects were produced before PW5, Excise Inspector, Adoor Excise Range. He registered C.R.No.19 of 1998 through Ext.P6 occurrence report. He produced the material objects before Court through Ext.P7 property list. An application was filed before court for drawing the sample from the contraband and for subjecting it to chemical analysis. The appellant was produced before court through Ext.P8 remand application. PW6 completed the investigation and filed the final report. Ext.P9 certificate of chemical analysis shows that the sample contained 22.9% by volume of ethyl alcohol.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that there is no sufficient evidence in this case to prove that Ext.P9 certificate of chemical analysis pertains to the sample drawn from the contraband allegedly seized from the house of the appellant and therefore, there is no sufficient evidence to connect the appellant with the crime.