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.

V.Sunil Kumar vs the State of Kerala

V.Sunil Kumar vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 25, 2024
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1290784

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
Case Number
Crl.Rev.Pet/975/2012

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V.Sunil Kumar

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....34 and 67b of the abkari act as they were found transporting two cans of illicit arrack of 35 litres each in an autorickshaw. the concurrent judgment of conviction rendered by both the trial court and the first appellate court is brought under challenge mainly on the reason that the vehicle, which was used for transportation of the alleged contraband, was not confiscated and produced before the court. the sample collected for examination is not 180ml, but 375ml and it is evident from ext.p12. on chemical examination, it is found that it has the strength of 37.63ml ethyl alcohol as against 1000ml. both the trial court and the first appellate court concurrently found that the accused is guilty of the abovesaid offences. but the sentence awarded for the offence under section 8(1) of the actcrl.r.p.no.975 of 2012 3 seems to be so exorbitant. no bad antecedent is reported and being a first time offender, the substantive sentence will stand reduced to simple imprisonment for two months and a fine amount ofrs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only), in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. the petitioner is also entitled to set off of the period of detention already undergone. the criminal revision petition will stand allowed in part by modifying the sentence accordingly. sd/- p.somarajan judge dmr/-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN MONDAY, THE 25th DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1946 CRL.REV.PET NO. 975 OF 2012 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.03.2012 IN CRA NO.36 OF 2010 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, FAST TRACK (ADHOC-I), KOZHIKODE ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.01.2010 IN SC NO.1217 OF 2006 OF ASSISTANT SESSIONS COURT/II ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE REVISION PETITIONERS/APPELLANT/ACCUSED 2 & 3: 1 V.SUNIL KUMAR, AGED 36 YEARS, S/o DAMODARAN NAIR, NANGYALATH, VALIYA MANGOT, POOLAKKAD AMSOM, CHATHAMANGALAM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. 2 CHANDRAN, AGED 40 YEARS, S/o VELLAN, KARIKKANARI MEETHAL HOUSE, POOLAKKAD AMSOM, CHATHAMANGALAM DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV SMT.BIMALA BABY RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: THE STATE OF KERALA, THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, KUNNAMANGALAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY SR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI C N PRABHAKARAN THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 25.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.R.P.No.975 of 2012 2

ORDER

Accused Nos.2 and 3 came up against the concurrent judgment of conviction for the offence under Section 8(1), 34 and 67B of the Abkari Act as they were found transporting two cans of illicit arrack of 35 litres each in an autorickshaw. The concurrent judgment of conviction rendered by both the trial court and the first appellate court is brought under challenge mainly on the reason that the vehicle, which was used for transportation of the alleged contraband, was not confiscated and produced before the court. The sample collected for examination is not 180ml, but 375ml and it is evident from Ext.P12. On chemical examination, it is found that it has the strength of 37.63ml ethyl alcohol as against 1000ml. Both the trial court and the first appellate court concurrently found that the accused is guilty of the abovesaid offences. But the sentence awarded for the offence under Section 8(1) of the Act

Crl.R.P.No.975 of 2012                      3
seems     to     be      so    exorbitant.       No   bad    antecedent      is
reported        and       being      a   first    time       offender,      the
substantive           sentence       will   stand      reduced     to   simple
imprisonment             for   two   months     and    a    fine   amount    of

Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only), in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The petitioner is also entitled to set off of the period of detention already undergone. The Criminal Revision Petition will stand allowed in part by modifying the sentence accordingly. Sd/- P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE DMR/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial