N. NARAYANAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused in S.T.C. No. 858 of 1991 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kasaragod and the appellant in Crl. A. No. 116 of 1998 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kasaragod, is the revision petitioner herein. The revision petitioner was charge sheeted by the Excise Inspector, Kasaragod Excise Range in Crime No. 120 of 1990 alleging commission of offence under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that on 4.12.1990 at about 4 p.m., the accused was found to be in possession of about 20 litres of wash, a material used for preparing arrack in violation of the provisions of the Abkari Act and thereby he had committed the offence punishable under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act. After evidence earlier, the trial court convicted the accused for the said offence and sentenced him, which was challenged by him before the Sessions Court by filing Crl. A. No. 9 of 1995 and the learned Sessions Judge by judgment dated 10.11.1995 set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned magistrate and remanded the case for fresh disposal with some directions. Thereafter, P.Ws. 1 to 3 were recalled and further examined and P.Ws. 4 and 5 were examined on the side of the prosecution. Exts. P1 to P7 were marked on their side. After the completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was again questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and he denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against him in the prosecution evidence and further submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the case. On the date of incident, the Preventive Officer came to his house and asked for some tapioca, which he had handed over to him in the presence of D.W. 1. Thereafter, he was made to sign certain papers at the instigation of one Narayanan, S/o. Raman, who was responsible for filing certain cases through one Seethu against his brother -in -law. It is stated that due to his intervention and help, that case filed by the said Seethu, was dismissed. On account of that enmity and at the instigation of said Narayanan with the help of excise officials, he has been falsely implicated in this case. In order to prove his case, D.W. 1 was examined and the accused himself was examined as D.W. 2 and Exts. D1 to D8 were marked on his side. The prosecution also marked MO 1 through the prosecution witnesses. After considering the evidence on record, the learned magistrate again found the revision petitioner guilty under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act and convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months and also to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/ - and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for another 3 months. Aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned magistrate, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Sessions Court, Kasaragod as Crl. A. No. 116 of 1998. The learned Sessions Judge by the impugned judgment, dismissed the appeal confirming the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision petition has been filed by the revision petitioner.

(2.) HEARD Sri. Grashious Kuriakose, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner and Sri. S. Jamal, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor argued that the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 3 will go to show that the contraband article was seized from the possession of the accused and the evidence of DWs 1 and 2 is not sufficient to prove the case of false implication as alleged by them. Further the identity of the article has not been questioned by the revision petitioner. So under the circumstances, the courts below were perfectly justified in convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act and no interference is called for in the hands of this Court.