1. The accused in C.C.431/79 was convicted by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Wadakkancherry for an offence punishable under S.55(g) of the Abkari Act. He was sentenced to simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/-. In CrI.A. 97 of 1981 the Sessions Judge, Trichur confirmed the conviction and sentence. The revision petition was filed by her.

2. The allegation against her is that on 10-2-1979 he was found to carry fourteen litres of wash intended for the manufacture of illicit arrack in a mud pot. The sample of the wash on analysis was found to contain 1.86 per cent of ethyl alcohol. The concurrent findings of guilt based on the evidence was not seriously attempted to be challenged. The attempt was only to attack the conviction and sentence on certain alleged illegalities and irregularities.

3. The first contention was that sample of wash was not given to the revision petitioner and the report of analysis contains only the conclusions and not the data. These are contentions not raised before the trial court or the appellate court. There is no provision in the Abkari Act, as in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, enabling the accused to have a secon