KATRAVATH BAPYA NAIK Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Ss. 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[the Cr.P.C], challenging the judgment dtd. 20/11/2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No.134 of 2008 on the file of the learned X Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Guntur at Narasaraopet[the Appellate Court], confirming the judgment dtd. 22/4/2008 passed in C.C.No.236 of 2005 on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Gurazala[the Trial Court], whereby and whereunder the Petitioner/Accused No.2 was found guilty of the offence punishable under Sec. 7A read with Sec. 8(e) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995[the A.P.P. Act], and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00.

(2.) Sri Sravan Kumar Mannava, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, while reiterating the grounds of revision, argued that even though necessary ingredients of offence under Sec. 7A read with Sec. 8(e) of 'the A.P.P. Act' are not made out, the Petitioner was convicted; evidence of the witnesses of the prosecution is inconsistent and not corroborating; the case was foisted implicating the Petitioner for statistical purposes; the seized contraband is a planted one; independent witnesses were not deliberately examined and urged to allow the Criminal Revision Case.

(3.) It is further argued that, in this case a disturbing feature is there that the officer who participated in the ride conducted investigation, he had got vested interest in the matter and falsely implicated the Accused No.2 in this case. Hence, it is urged to set aside the judgment of the learned Appellate Court as the person who registered the FIR and conducted the investigation and filed charge sheet is one and the same.