(1.) The revision petitioner herein is the 1st accused in Crime No.27/1999 of the Ayyampuzha Police Station. He faced prosecution before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Perumbavoor in C.C 335/2004 on the allegation that at about 5.30 p.m on 13.3.1997 at a rubber plantation at Vettilapara, he and the 2nd accused were found distilling arrack by the Sub Inspector of Police, Ayyampuzha. The Sub Inspector proceeded for detection on the basis of secret reliable information. The prosecution would allege that on seeing the Police party, the 2nd accused ran across the river, but the 1st accused was caught and arrested on the spot. A huge quantity of wash contained in seven barrels was seized by the Sub Inspector as per a mahazar. He collected 10 litres of wash in a plastic can and destroyed the remaining quantity of wash at the spot of detection. The accused and the properties were taken to the Police Station where he registered the F.I.R against two accused.
(2.) After investigation, the Police submitted final report under Section 55(g) of the Kerala Abkari Act (for short 'the Act'). The case against the 2nd accused was split up and refiled when he absconded. The 1st accused appeared before the learned Magistrate and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against him. The prosecution examined three witnesses and proved Exts.P1 to P3 documents in the trial court. The MO1 and MO2 properties were also identified during trial. The accused denied the incriminating circumstances when examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 He did not adduce any evidence in defence.
(3.) On an appreciation of the evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty. On conviction, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, and to pay a fine of 25,000 by judgment dated. ? 30.6.2004. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, the accused approached the Court of Session, Ernakulam with Crl.A 770/2004. In appeal, the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Now the accused is before this Court in revision challenging the legality and propriety of the conviction and sentence.