JOSE Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner stands arrayed as the accused in Crime No.2/2017 of Kalpeni Island Police Station, Union Territory of Lakshadweep for offences punishable under Sections 3(a), (b), (f), (g), (k) & 7 (a) of Lakshadweep Prohibition Regulation, 1979.

(2.) It was alleged by the prosecution that, on 23.07.2017 at 1.00 a.m., the petitioner had conspired and agreed to distill arrack. A search was conducted in the premises. The implements and the raw materials for distilling arrack were found out. They were arrested and are in custody since then. Learned counsel for the petitioners have approached this Court on a premise that the petitioners have been detained in custody on a bailable offence, which was thoroughly illegal. On the other hand, learned Standing counsel for the Lakshadweep Administration invited my attention to the various provisions invoked against them, specifically Sec. 7(a) which provides for sentence up to 3 years.

(3.) The learned counsel invited my attention to the decision of this Court in Boban V. Union of India (2005 KHC 716) wherein while interpreting an identical provision under the Customs Act, the Single Bench of this Court held that when the sentence of imprisonment is up to 3 years that falls within the ambit of a non-bailable offence and the contention to the contrary was not legally sustainable. I am satisfied that the decision is squarely applicable to the facts of this Court.