IN RE: SETHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a criminal revision case filed by the accused Sethu under Section 397, Cr.P.C, against the judgment dated 25th September, 1982 in C.A. No. 183 of 1981 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, North Arcot Division at Vellore, confirming the conviction of the accused -revision Petitioner herein under Section 4(l)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act (Act 10 of 1937) and the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs. 2,000 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month imposed on the revision Petitioner herein by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vellore, by his order, dated 18th August, 1981 in C.C. No. 193 of 1981.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution against the accused -revision Petitioner herein is that on 7th January, 1981 at about 2.30 p.m. at Melakuppam on the southern side of the hill and about two miles away from Thethamparai channel the accused was found distilling illicit arrack by P.W.1 Lolan, Sub -Inspector of Police attached to the Prohibition Wing, and the accused was arrested at that place From the fermented wash, five litres had been retained and the rest was destroyed. The sample of the fermented wash and the distilled arrack were sent for Chemical analysis. Ex.P5 is the report of the Chemical Analyst. Soon after Ex.P5 was obtained, the complaint was filed by the Sub -Inspector of Police, Prohibition Wing, Vellore, against the accused herein before the trial Court. The trial court held that the accused is guilty of the offence with which he had been charged and convicted him under Section 4(l)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act (Act 10 of 1937) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. Aggrieved by the above decision of the trial Court, the accused -revision Petitioner herein preferred C.A. No. 183 of 1981 before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North Arcot Division at Vellore. The lower appellate Court on the question whether the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt, came to the same conclusion arrived at by the trial Court and confirmed the conviction and sentence passed against the accused by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the decision of the lower Appellate Court, the accused has come forward with this criminal revision case.

(3.) THE point for consideration in this criminal revision case is: -