SELVARAJ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are A 1 and 2 in Sessions case 495/2004 before Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track- IV), Thiruvananthapuram. Being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence for offence punishable under Section 55 (g) of Abkari Act, (for short the Act), this appeal has been preferred. In fact, the appellants were charged for offences punishable under Section 55 (a) and (g) of Abkari Act of which they were acquitted of offence punishable under Section 55 (a) of the Act. What survives in this appeal is their challenge as regards conviction and sentence for offence punishable under Section 55 (g) of the Abkari Act. They were sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years and pay a fine of Rs. One lakh, with default sentence of another RI for 3 months.

(2.) The prosecution case is that on 8.6.2001, Sub Inspector of Police, Neyyardam and his party on getting secret information that appellants were distilling arrack in a place called Ayyavilakom near Paarankadav, Thoduvettippara within the station limit reached the place at 2.30 PM and found the appellants being involved in distilling arrack used implements for making arrack. The Police party consisting of PW4, the detecting Sub Inspector and PW3, Police Constable attached to Neyyardam Police Station intercepted the appellants and inspected MO1 20 litres of Can containing arrack as well as MO2 aluminium vessel containing wash used for making arrack. After being satisfied that the appellants were involved in distilling arrack with the aid of prohibited distillery, took samples of wash in two bottles of 375 ml each from MO2 aluminium vessel. MO1 Can containing arrack was sealed and labelled in accordance with law in the presence of independent witnesses examined as Pws 1 and 2. The samples of wash were also similarly sealed and labelled in the presence of witnesses. Exts P3 and P4 arrest records were also prepared by PW4 at the spot itself after arrest of the appellants. The material objects and appellants were brought to the station house and after completing the necessary legal formalities, they were produced in Court the very next day. PW4 himself investigated the case and laid final report before the committal court.

(3.) After the case came to Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram, it was made over for trial to Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track- IV), Thiruvananthapuram, where the appellants pleaded not guilty of offences punishable under Section 55 (a) and (g) of the Act, when charge was framed and read over and explained to them.