K. Surendra Mohan, J.

1. The question that arises for consideration in this Writ Appeal is whether the obtaining of a Report of Chemical Analysis is a pre-condition for registering a crime under the Abkari Act and for suspension of an Abkari licence?

2. The State is in appeal before us challenging the judgment dated 16.02.2015 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 3511 of 2015. The respondent herein had filed the said writ petition challenging Ext. P3 order of the Excise Commissioner (1st appellant) suspending his licence and seeking the issue of directions permitting him to conduct the Toddy Shops in group No. VI of Karthikappally Excise Range despite Ext. P2 Crime and Occurrence Report and the registration of a crime, apart from other ancillary reliefs. The writ petition has been allowed by the learned Single Judge holding that suspension of the respondent's licence was unsustainable for the reason that the same was issued without obtaining a Chemical Analysis Report.

3. The respondent was the licensee of the toddy shops in Group No. VI of Karthikappally Excise Range for the year 2015. Accordingly, the respondent was issued with necessary licences to conduct the toddy shops in Group No. VI. On 19.12.2014 at about 02.30 p.m., an Excise Party conducted a search of toddy shop No. 30/14-15 of which the respondent was the licensee. At the time of the search, some persons were found to be standing on the south-western portion of the property in which the toddy shop was situate. The Excise Party proceeded to the said spot and seized 95.4 liters of spirit, 39.8 liters of sugar solution, 459.2 liters of spirit laced sugar solution, 996 liters of toddy etc. Three persons were arrested from the spot. A crime was registered as C.R. No. 154/2014 of Karthikappally Excise Range. A copy of the Crime and Occurrence Report was produced along with the Writ Petition, marked as Ext. P2.

4. According to the respondent, he was not made an accused in Ext. P2 Crime and Occurrence Report. Later, by way of an additional report, he was included as the 4th respondent in the case. It is the case of the respondent that, he was so arrayed as an accused in the said criminal case only for the reason that, he was the licensee of toddy shop No. 30 of Group No. VI of Karthikappally Excise Range. It is the further case of the respondent that, no contraband was seized from the licensed premises, which is confined to the limits of the toddy shop alone. The seizure, according to him, was made from outside the licensed premises, though the actual spot from which the seizure was made is within the same compound in which the toddy shop was situate. The respondent also contended that there was no evidence or other materials to connect him to the offences. In other words, according to the respondent, his implication as an accused in the crime was without any bona fides whatsoever. It also does not have any legal backing. The persons arrested are strangers to the respondent. They are not employees of the toddy shop or any one connected with him.

5. In spite of the above, the 1st appellant by the issue of Ext. P3 proceedings, suspended the licences of the toddy shops in Group No. VI of Karthikappally Excise Range. The respondent was also directed to show cause why his licence should not be cancelled. The respondent submitted Ext. P4 reply to the show cause notice. The Writ Petition was filed by the respondent at the said stage, contending that the entire proceedings were vitiated by the non-compliance of Rule 8(3) of the Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules" for short). The respondent contended that a crime could be registered only after obtaining a report of Chemical Analysis in respect of the contraband that was allegedly seized. In the present case, at the time of issuing Ext. P3, since a Chemical Analysis Report had not been obtained, it was contended that the entire proceedings were vitiated by the non-compliance o