Chandran P, S/O Kelappan vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 9279 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
 WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944
                 CRL.REV.PET NO. 1783 OF 2007
AGAINST THE   JUDGMENT in CRA 461/2006 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
                  & SESSIONS COURT, VADAKARA
          SC 392/2004 OF SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE
REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

         CHANDRAN P, S/O KELAPPAN
         AGED 43 YEARS
         PULLIYANKOTTUMEETHAL, PONMERI AMSOM DESOM,
         VATAKARA TALUK.

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.PULIKKOOL ABUBACKER
         SMT.RAKHI K.KUMAR
         SRI.ZUBAIR PULIKKOOL



RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:

         STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, VATAKARA THROUGH
         PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
         ERNAKULAM.



     THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.R.P.No.1783/2007

                                -:2:-




                              O R D E R

Dated this the 10th day of August, 2022

This criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated

16/3/2007 in Crl.Appeal No.461/2006 on the file of the Additional

District and Sessions Court, Vadakara (for short, the appellate

court) confirming the judgment dated 19/6/2006 in SC

No.392/2004 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kozhikode (for

short, the trial court).

2. The prosecution case in short is that on 29/6/2001, at

about 3.30 p.m, the accused, a passenger in Bus No.KL-11

A/8586, was found in possession of Indian Made Foreign Liquor

illegally imported from the State of Pondicherry and contained in

four bottles of 375 ml capacity and two bottles of 180 ml capacity

in contravention of the Abkari Act and Rules and thereby

committed the offence.

3. On receipt of summons, the accused appeared at the

court below. After hearing both sides, the court below framed

charge under S. 55(a) of the Abkari Act. The charge was read Crl.R.P.No.1783/2007

over and explained to the accused who pleaded not guilty. On

the side of the prosecution, PWs1 to 5 were examined and Exts.

P1 to P7 were marked. On the side of the defence, Ext.D1 was

marked. MO1 and MO2 were also marked. On appreciation of the

evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty under Section

55(a) of the Abkari Act and he was convicted for the said offence.

The trial court sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment

for one year and to pay a fine of `1,00,000/-, in default, to suffer

rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. The

appellate court confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by

the trial court. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence passed

by the courts below, this revision petition has been preferred.

4. Heard both sides.

5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner

impeached the finding of guilt passed by the courts below on the

ground that the mahazar does not contain seal or its description.

6. The learned Public Prosecutor, on the other hand,

supported the findings and verdict of the courts below and

submitted that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the Crl.R.P.No.1783/2007

case beyond reasonable doubt.

7. The learned counsel contended that there is no sample

seal in the mahazar. This Court in K.Bhaskaran v. State of

Kerala (2020(5) KLT Online 1057) has held that the specimen

seal shall be provided in the seizure mahazar and also in the

forwarding note, so as to enable the court to satisfy the

genuineness of the sample produced in the court. It was also

observed in the said judgment that the nature of the seal used

shall be mentioned in the seizure mahazar. A perusal of Ext.P1

mahazar would show that it does not contain the sample seal or

the description of the seal used.

8. The aforesaid vital aspect was not taken into

consideration by the courts below while appreciating the

prosecution case. For the reasons stated above, I am of the view

that the conviction and sentence passed by the courts below

suffer from illegality and it cannot be sustained.

In the result, the criminal revision petition stands allowed.

The conviction and sentence passed by the courts below vide the

impugned judgments are set aside. The revision petitioner is Crl.R.P.No.1783/2007

found not guilty of the offences charged against him and

accordingly he is acquitted. His bail bond is cancelled.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE Rp