Kurian. Vs. State of KeralA.

Kurian. vs State of KeralA.

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 03, 2010

~5 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/912903

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/912903
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: P.Q.Barkath Ali, J.
Decided On: Dec 03, 2010
Case Number: CRL.A.No. 1023 of 2003
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

[Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA; ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.] - It was the case of the appellant that certain candidates belonging to backward class `A' category had been given appointment against the posts of general category and had it not been done so, the appellant would have got the appointment. After hearing the learned counsel ...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Abkari Act - section 55(a), 13, 10, 63; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - section 313

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kurian.

Advocate SRI.ROBSON PAUL, Adv.

Respondent

State of KeralA.

Legal References

Acts: Abkari Act - section 55(a), 13, 10, 63; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - section 313

Excerpt

[dr. mukundakam sharma; anil r. dave, jj.] - it was the case of the appellant that certain candidates belonging to backward class `a' category had been given appointment against the posts of general category and had it not been done so, the appellant would have got the appointment. after hearing the learned counsel and on perusal of record, the high court rejected the petition by the judgment dated 18th july, 2003. factually, the court found that no candidate of general class, who had secured less marks than the appellant, was appointed as an art and craft teacher and, therefore, the petition had been rejected. the learned counsel appearing for the appellant made a similar grievance before this court. moreover, the learned counsel submitted that there was one vacancy as shri kartar singh, who had been appointed as an art and craft teacher had submitted his resignation and, therefore, on the vacancy which had arisen on account of resignation of shri kartar singh, the appellant should have been appointed as an art and craft teacher. upon perusal of the record, we find that the appellant had secured 62 marks whereas the last candidate of the general category who was selected had secured 71 marks. the waiting list lapsed on 27th april, 2000 and, therefore, the said list could not have been operated after 27th april, 2000. .....road in front of the house of one thankachan at pangarappall desom the accused was found to be in possession of 5 litres of indian made foreign liquor (6 bottles of 750 ml. and 1 bottle of 500 ml.) and that thereby committed the offence punishable under section 55(a) of the abkari act. pw1 arrested the accused from the spot and prepared seizure mahazar ext.p1. ext.p2 is the arrest memo and ext.p4 is the body search memo. pw1 brought the accused to the office and registered the case against him. 3. pw3 conducted the investigation. after completing the investigation, charge was laid before the committal court i.e., first class magistrate court, wadkkanchery. 4. when the accused appeared before the committal court, copies of documents relied on by the prosecution were furnished to him. as the offence under section 55(a) of the abkari act is exclusively triable by a court of sessions, the case was committed to the sessions court, thrissur from where it was made over to the lower court for trial and disposal. 5. the accused on appearance before the trial court pleaded not guilty to the charge under section 55(a) of the abkari act. pws.1 to 3 was examined and exts.p1 to p13 and mos.1 and 2 were marked on the side of the prosecution. when questioned under section 313 cr.p.c. by the learned magistrate, the accused denied the entire incident. 6. the trial court on an appreciation of the evidence found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under section 55(a) of the abkari act, convicted him thereunder and sentenced him as aforesaid. now the accused has come up in appeal challenging his conviction and sentence. 7. heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned public prosecutor. 8. the following points arise for consideration : 1) whether the conviction of the appellant under section 55(a) of the abkari act by the trial court can be sustained if not, what is the offence committed by the accused 2) what is the proper sentence that can be imposed? 9. pw1.....

Full Judgment

1. Challenge in this appeal by the accused is to the judgment of the III Addl. Sessions Judge (ADHOC) (Fast Track Court No.I), Thrissur in S.C. No.361 of 2002 dated May 26, 2003 convicting him under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.1 lakh, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months.

2. The case of the prosecution, as testified by PW1, the then Preventive Officer of the Pazhayannur Excise Range, and PW2, the then Excise Guard of the same Excise Range, before the lower court is that on November 12, 1998 at about 6.15 p.m. on the panchayat road in front of the house of one Thankachan at Pangarappall desom the accused was found to be in possession of 5 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (6 bottles of 750 ml. and 1 bottle of 500 ml.) and that thereby committed the offence punishable under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. PW1 arrested the accused from the spot and prepared seizure mahazar Ext.P1. Ext.P2 is the arrest memo and Ext.P4 is the body search memo. PW1 brought the accused to the office and registered the case against him.

3. PW3 conducted the investigation. After completing the investigation, charge was laid before the committal court i.e., First Class Magistrate Court, Wadkkanchery.

4. When the accused appeared before the committal court, copies of documents relied on by the prosecution were furnished to him. As the offence under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act is exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Thrissur from where it was made over to the lower court for trial and disposal.

5. The accused on appearance before the trial court pleaded not guilty to the charge under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. PWs.1 to 3 was examined and Exts.P1 to P13 and MOs.1 and 2 were marked on the side of the prosecution. When questioned under section 313 Cr.P.C. by the learned Magistrate, the accused denied the entire incident.

6. The trial court on an appreciation of the evidence found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act, convicted him thereunder and sentenced him as aforesaid. Now the accused has come up in appeal challenging his conviction and sentence.

7. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor.

8. The following points arise for consideration :

1) Whether the conviction of the appellant under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act by the trial court can be sustained If not, what is the offence committed by the accused

2) What is the proper sentence that can be imposed?

9. PW1 Detecting Officer and PW2 Excise Guard testified in terms of the prosecution case before the lower court. I have gone through their evidence. No serious discrepancies were brought out during their cross examination to discredit their evidence. They have no enmity towards the accused to foist a false against him. Therefore, in my view, the lower court is perfectly justified in accepting their evidence and coming to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the seizure of MOs.1 and 2 the contraband articles from the accused.

10. The next question for consideration is whether the conviction of the accused under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act can be sustained? A Division Bench of this Court in B. Abdulla V. Station House Officer and another (2007(4) KHC 90) has held that mere possession of Indian Made Foreign Liquor in excess of the permissible quantity would not attract section 55(a) of the Abkari Act and in such a case the accused can be found guilty only under section 63 of the Abkari Act for having violated sections 10 and 13 of the Act ie., for having been in possession of liquor in excess of the permissible quantity. The prosecution has no case that the accused has kept the Foreign Liquor for sale. During that period the permissible quantity of Indian Made Foreign Liquor that can be possessed by a person is 4.5 litres as seen from S.R.O. No.89/69 issued under G.O.(P) No.82/69/RD dated 19-2-1969, which was reduced to 1.5 litres as per S.R.O. No.127/99 under G.O.(P) No.22/99/TD dated 5-2-1999. Therefore, in the present case also accused can only be found guilty of keeping Indian Made Foreign Liquor in excess of the permissible quantity, which is punishable under section 63 of the Abkari Act. That being so, his conviction under section 55 (a) of the Abkari Act cannot be sustained and he can be convicted only under section 63 of the Abkari Act for violation of sections 10 and 13 of the Abkari Act. Therefore,the conviction of the appellant under section 55(a) is set aside and he is convicted under section 63 of the Abkari Act.

11. The next question for consideration is proper punishment to be imposed. The maximum sentence that can be imposed under section 63 of the Abkari Act is a fine upto Rs.5,000/- or imprisonment which may extent to two years. The incident happened on November 12, 1998 and quantity involved is 5 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. No previous conviction is pleaded or proved against the appellant/accused. Therefore, I feel that imprisonment till rising of court and fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month would meet the ends of justice.

12. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. Conviction of the appellant under section 55(a) of the Abkari Act is set aside and he is convicted under section section 63 of the Abkari Act. He is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising of court and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. Two months' time is granted for payment of fine. His bail bonds are cancelled.

13. He shall surrender before the trial court on or before 31-1-2011 to suffer the sentence.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2010 Same Parties Kurian. vs State of KeralA. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge P.Q.Barkath Ali, J. Acts & Sections Abkari Act - section 55(a), 13, 10, 63; Code of Criminal Proc...

Criminal