SATHYAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above appeal is filed at the instance of the accused in S.C.No.83 of 2003 of the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Alappuzha , challenging the judgment dated 28.4.2005 in the above sessions case as he is convicted and sentenced for the offences under Sections 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act.

(2.) The prosecution case is that at about 7.30 p.m. on 18.12.2001, while Pws.1 and 2 conducted patrol duty, they saw the appellant/accused coming from the opposite direction by holding a can of 5 litres capacity along the road which proceeds from Ikkaramukku to Paruthipallikadavu. While the accused tried to run away from the spot, on seeing the excise party, he was intercepted and on inspection of the can which was held by the accused, the officials realised that the can contains two litres of illicit arrack on ascertaining the same by smelling and tasting. Thus, according to the prosecution, the accused has committed the offences punishable under Sections 8 (1) and (2) and 55(a) of the Abkari Act.

(3.) On the basis of the above allegation, Crime No.112 of 2001 was registered in the Mavelikkara Excise Range and on completing the investigation, they filed a charge sheet before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Chengannur and the case was committed to the court of Sessions, Alappuzha (C.P.No.80 of 2002) and it was made over for trial and disposal to the Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Alappuzha, who framed charge against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 8(1) and (2) and 55(a) of the Abkari Act. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried for the above offences. Subsequently, the learned Sessions Judge, Alappuzha by order dated 10.9.2004 withdrew the case from the file of the Additional Assistant Sessions Court and transferred the same to the present trial court for trial and disposal. Thus, on the appearance of the accused, the case was posted for further trial during which Pws.1 to 5 were examined from the side of the prosecution and Exts.P1 to P4 were marked. MO1 can was also identified as material object. The trial court by an elaborate judgment finally found that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused kept in his possession and transported two litres of arrack in MO1 can for sale at about 7.30 p.m. on 18.1.2001 in contravention of Sections 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act and accordingly, he is found guilty for the said offence and he is convicted for the same. On such conviction, the appellant/accused is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rupees one lakh and in default to pay fine, the appellant/accused is directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and set off is allowed. Challenging the above finding and order of conviction and sentence, the appellant/the accused in the above sessions case preferred this appeal.