P SURENDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the second accused/licensee of a toddy shop. Samples of toddy were allegedly drawn from his premises on 3.9.1997. On analysis it was found to contain 13.82% by volume of ethyl alcohol. On receipt of that report, complaint was filed and cognizance was taken of the offence punishable under Section 57(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act against him. C.P.No. 141 of 2002 is registered against the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner has come to this Court complaining that on the relevant date as the law stood the petitioner cannot even allegedly be held to be guilty of any offence. The rule prescribing maximum percentage of ethyl alcohol which can be found in toddy had come into force w.e.f. 1.4.2000 only and in the light of the dictum in O.P.No. 17172 of 1999 produced as Annex.F, there can be no valid prosecution against the petitioner, it is urged.

(3.) The learned Prosecutor does not oppose the prayer of the petitioner and submits that the prosecution has no objection in the Crl.M.C.No. 237 of 2007 2 proceedings against the petitioner being quashed. I find the prayer to be absolutely justified.