JUDGMENT :

The appellant was convicted and sentenced by the court below under Section 8(2) of the Abkari Act.

2. The prosecution allegation is that on 09.01.1999 at about 12.45 p.m., the appellant was found in possession of 750 ml of arrack in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act.

3. Heard.

4. The learned Counsel for the appellant has argued that since no forwarding note was produced or marked in this case, the appellant is entitled to be acquitted.

5. No forwarding note was produced or marked in this case.

6. In Sasidharan v. State of Kerala [2007 (1) KLT 720], the Court observed thus:

“Without the link evidence of actual sampling by the concerned clerk of the court by drawing sample from the can and sending the same in a sealed packet to the Chemical Examiner with a specimen seal sent separately for tamper proof despatch, the Prosecution cannot be held to have brought home the offence against the appellant".

7. In Ravi v. State of Kerala [2011 (3) KLT 353], the Division Bench of this Court held that the prosecution in a case under the Abkari Act could succeed only if it is shown that the contraband liquor which was allegedly seized from the accused ultimately reached the han