JOY @ MATTATHIL KURIYAKOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the judgment of conviction and sentence in S.C.No.58 of 2001 on the files of Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc - II), Kasargod. The conviction is under Section 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act. The sentence imposed is to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only), in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The case of the prosecution in a nut shell is as follows:

(3.) When the appeal came up for hearing, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant vehemently argued before this Court that, here is a case where there were so many discrepancies in the evidence of the witness, which will indicate that the case now presented before the Court was reliable. It is also the submission of the learned Counsel that the independent witness deposed anything supporting the prosecution, which was an indication that, in truth, there was no seizure as now claimed by the officials. It is also submitted before this Court that even though, the case of the prosecution is that, the seizure was at railway station premises, no personnel from the railway protection force was seen examined before the trial court. Admittedly, the independent witness was hailing far away from the place of incident. Under such circumstances, the appellant is entitled for benefit of doubt.