Kunjumon vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 6829 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

    FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                         CRL.A.No.2024 OF 2006

  AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 807/2003 DATED 22-09-2006 OF
      ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)FAST TRACK COURT-III,
                          PATHANAMTHITTA

 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CP 133/2002 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
                      OF FIRST CLASS , ADOOR


APPELLANT/S:

                KUNJUMON, S/O. DANIEL,
                MANJAPPUNNA THEKKETHIL HOUSE,, MANJAPPUNNA COLONY,
                THEKKEKARA,, KODUMON, ADOOR TALUK.

                BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANILAL

RESPONDENT/S:

                STATE OF KERALA
                REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
                ERNAKULAM.

                R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
                SRI. CHANDRASENAN.D (SR.P.P.)

     THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.02.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CRL.A.No.2024 OF 2006

                                   -2-




                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26th day of February 2021

This is yet another instance where the prosecution case has

to fail on account of the failure of the prosecution to produce

the forwarding note. This Court has time and again held that

absence of forwarding note is fatal to the prosecution case.

Reference is invited to the decisions in Sadasivan @ Para v.

State of Kerala and another (2020 KHC 478) and Smithesh v.

State of Kerala (2019 2 KLT 974 ) .

2. I have heard Adv.Nitheesh.S appearing for the

appellant as well as Adv.Chandrasenan.D the learned Public

Prosecutor.

3. Adv.Nitheesh.S, the learned counsel for the petitioner

after referring to the appendix to the judgment, argued that the

forwarding note has not been produced in evidence in the

instant case and hence, the accused is entitled to be acquitted. CRL.A.No.2024 OF 2006

4. I have perused the records produced as Exts.P1 to P9

and I have also perused the deposition of PWs 1 to 4.

5. The learned counsel is correct in his submission that

the forwarding note has not been marked in evidence.

6. The accused was found guilty by the court below for

possessing and transporting 3 litres of arrack in MO1 can. By

judgment dated 22.09.2006 in S.C No.807/2003, the Sessions

Court had found the accused guilty under Section 8(2) r/w

Section 8(1) of the Kerala Abkari Act and convicted and

sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for one

year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment

of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for two months.

7. In view of the absence of the forwarding note which is

fatal to the prosecution case, I am of the view that the accused is

entitled to be acquitted in this case.

8. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence imposed by

judgment dated 22.09.2006 in S.C No.807/2003 on the files of the CRL.A.No.2024 OF 2006

Additional District & Sessions Judge (Adhoc) Fast Track Court-III,

Pathanamthitta is set aside. The accused is hereby acquitted and

is set at liberty. The bail bond if any, furnished by the accused

shall stand cancelled. Fine amount, if remitted, shall be refunded

to the appellant.

The Criminal Appeal is allowed as above.

Sd/­

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

JUDGE

JS