BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, J.

1. The appellant was convicted by the Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc)-III, Pathanamthitta, for the offence under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The appellant challenges the conviction and sentence so passed by the court below against him in this appeal.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

3. The prosecution case is briefly stated as follows: PW1, the Excise Inspector, Excise Range office, Konni and his party were on patrol at Eramkara in Malayalapuzha Village, at about 6 p.m. on 10.7.2002. While so, the appellant was seen carrying a 35 litre black jerrycan on his right shoulder. Seeing the excise party, the appellant attempted to flee away leaving the jerrycan there. But, the excise party stopped him there. On examining that jerrycan, it was found that it contained about 20 litres of wash. Since the appellant had committed an offence under the Abkari Act, he was arrested then and there by PW1 preparing Ext.P1 Arrest Memo. Ext.P2 is the Intimation of Arrest. PW1 had drawn about 500 ml. of wash in a 750 ml. bottle as sample from the bulk contained in the jerrycan. The sample so drawn was sealed. The sample as well as the jerrycan were seized by PW1 under Ext.P3 Seizure Mahazar in the presence of witnesses. Thereafter, PW1 reached the Excise Range Office, Konni, with the appellant, contraband and the records and registered Crime No. 21 of 2002 of that Range Office. Ext.P4 is the Crime and Occurrence Report thus prepared by PW1. Ext.P5 is the List of Property produced by him before the court. He had produced the appellant before the court along with Ext.P6 Remand Report. He had also submitted a Forwarding Note before the court for subjecting the sample to chemical analysis. Ext.P7 is the Certificate of Chemical Analysis issued from the Chemical Examiner's Laboratory. The Investigation of the case had been conducted by PW5, the Excise Inspector attached to the Excise Circle Office, Pathanamthitta. He had questioned the witnesses and recorded their statements. PW6, the Excise Inspector, Excise Range Office, Konni, had verified the investigation and submitted the Final Report before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Pathanamthitta.

4. The learned Magistrate, after complying with the required legal formalities, committed the case to the Court of Session, Pathanamthitta and from there, it was made over to the Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc)-III, Pathanamthitta. The court below framed a charge against the appellant alleging the offence under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act. The appellant had pleaded not guilty of the charge. The prosecution examined PWs.1 to 6 and marked Exts.P1 to P9 and MO.1 on their side. The appellant was examined under Section 313 of Cr. P.C. He had denied all the incriminating circumstances shown against him. The defence had not adduced any evidence. The court below, after considering the matter, found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act and convicted him thereunder. He was heard on the question of sentence and imposed the sentence on him.

5. The appellant has raised various contentions challenging the conviction and sentence passed against him. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the alleged offence in this case had been detected by PW1. He was a competent officer for doing the same. But, the investigation of the case had been conducted by PW5, the Excise Inspector attached to the Excise Circle Office, Pathanamthitta. He is not a competent officer for conducting the investigation as per notification issued by the Government of Kerala under Section 4 of the Abkari Act empowering various officers for discharging various duties under the Abkari Act. The