Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

K.S.Sanu Vs. the Excise Inspector

K.S.Sanu vs The Excise Inspector

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 20, 2012
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1009609

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

K.S.Sanu

Respondent

The Excise Inspector

Excerpt

.....cherthala excise range. on 14.10.2009, a sample of toddy was taken from t.s.no.34 of which the petitioners were the licensees, by the excise authorities. on chemical analysis, the said sample was found to have the ethyl alcohol content of 8.37%. therefore, prosecution proceedings were initiated against them under section 57(a) of the abkari act. a crime was registered as per ext.p1 and the matter is pending. in the meanwhile, on the request of the petitioners, the second sample was got analysed by the public analyst. thereupon, it was found that the ethyl alcohol content was only 7.51% , which is within the permissible limit and therefore, does not attract the offence that has been w.p.(c)no.30981 of 2012 :2. : alleged. however, in spite of the above, the criminal proceedings continued. when the petitioners were not permitted to participate in the auction sale, they had approached this court. as per ext.p5 interim order, they had participated in the auction for the year 2012-13. by ext.p6 judgment, the auction was also directed to be confirmed in their names by this court.2. the counsel for the petitioners places reliance on ext.p7 report in crime no.116 of 2011. as per ext.p7, the excise authorities have requested that the criminal proceedings be referred. however, according to the petitioners, no action has been taken in the matter to finalise the proceedings. the petitioners therefore seek the issue of appropriate directions for finalising the proceedings.3. i have heard advocate k.reghu kottappuram, who appears for the petitioners as well as the learned government pleader. in view of the limited relief that is sought, this writ w.p.(c)no.30981 of 2012 :3. : petition is disposed directing the first respondent to finalise the proceedings by submitting a final report and withdrawing the prosecution, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate before 10.02.2013. sd/- k.surendra mohan, judge kkj

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012 29TH AGRAHAYANA 193 WP(C).No. 30981 of 2012 (W) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- 1. K.S.SANU, S/O. SUDHEEDRAN, MADHAVAM, THANEERMUKKAM P.O. CHERTHALA DISTRICT, ALAPPUZHA.

2. SATHYAKAMAN S/O. NARAYANANAN, KOCHUKARIYIL, KOKKOTHAMANGALAM P.O CHERTHALA, DISTRICT ALAPPUZHA. BY ADVS.SRI.K.REGHU KOTTAPPURAM SRI.M.MUKESH RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, CHERTHALA ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ”

524.

2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA ”

524.

3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, ALAPUZHA DIVISION, ALAPUZHA-68”

4. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM”

003. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.K.SHERIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 30981 of 2012 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT NO. 116/2011 EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17 02/2012 IN C.M.P 1297/2012 EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 23 02/2012 IN I.A 2842/2012 IN W.P(C) 765/2012. EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO. 1598 DATED 22 03/2012 EXHIBIT-P5-TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 25 07/2012. EXHIBIT-P6-TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08 08/2012 IN W.P(C)765/2012. EXHIBIT-P7-TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT IN C.R NO. 116/2011 . /true copy/ sd/- P.A. To Judge mrcs K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.

--------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.30981 of 2012 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of December, 2012 JUDGMENT

The petitioners are the licensees of toddy shop Nos. 30 to 35 in Group VI of Cherthala Excise Range. On 14.10.2009, a sample of toddy was taken from T.S.No.34 of which the petitioners were the licensees, by the Excise Authorities. On chemical analysis, the said sample was found to have the ethyl alcohol content of 8.37%. Therefore, prosecution proceedings were initiated against them under Section 57(a) of the Abkari Act. A crime was registered as per Ext.P1 and the matter is pending. In the meanwhile, on the request of the petitioners, the second sample was got analysed by the public analyst. Thereupon, it was found that the ethyl alcohol content was only 7.51% , which is within the permissible limit and therefore, does not attract the offence that has been W.P.(C)No.30981 of 2012 :

2. : alleged. However, in spite of the above, the criminal proceedings continued. When the petitioners were not permitted to participate in the auction sale, they had approached this Court. As per Ext.P5 interim order, they had participated in the auction for the year 2012-13. By Ext.P6 judgment, the auction was also directed to be confirmed in their names by this Court.

2. The counsel for the petitioners places reliance on Ext.P7 report in crime No.116 of 2011. As per Ext.P7, the Excise Authorities have requested that the criminal proceedings be referred. However, according to the petitioners, no action has been taken in the matter to finalise the proceedings. The petitioners therefore seek the issue of appropriate directions for finalising the proceedings.

3. I have heard Advocate K.Reghu Kottappuram, who appears for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader. In view of the limited relief that is sought, this writ W.P.(C)No.30981 of 2012 :

3. : petition is disposed directing the first respondent to finalise the proceedings by submitting a final report and withdrawing the prosecution, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate before 10.02.2013. Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE kkj

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial