IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.BADHARUDEEN
Babu @ Vishwanathan, S/o. Late Keshavan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By The Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam – Respondent
ORDER :
(A. BADHARUDEEN, J.)
1. Challenging the conviction and sentence dated 13.12.2013 imposed against the accused finding him guilty of the offence punishable under Section 8(2) of the Kerala Abkari Act (hereinafter referred to as `Abkari Act’ for easy reference) in S.C. No.791 of 2012 on the files of Additional Sessions Court-II, Kasaragode, the accused has come up in appeal arraying State as the respondent.
2. I shall refer the parties in the appeal as `prosecution’ and `accused’ hereinafter for easy reference.
3. The prosecution case is that at about 4 p.m on 13.02.2007, the accused was found in possession of 50 packets of arrack of 100 ml each along the road which leads from Kaikamba to Bayarpadavu carrying a bag, while the Excise Inspector, Excise Range Office, Kumbala, was on patrol duty. When the accused was found perplexed, he was questioned and accordingly the said contraband was taken into custody and crime was registered alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 8(2) of the Abkari Act.
4. On committal of the case before Sessions Court, Kasaragod, it was made out to the Additional Sessions Court-II, Kasaragod, and the Additional Sessions Court-II tried the
Failure to comply with statutory requirements for inventory preparation and certification under the Kerala Abkari Act undermines the prosecution's case, leading to acquittal.
Failure to comply with statutory requirements for inventory preparation and certification under the Kerala Abkari Act undermines the prosecution's case, leading to acquittal.
Defects in evidence documentation undermine a conviction under the Abkari Act, justifying acquittal.
The failure to strictly comply with the mandatory procedure under Section 53A of the Abkari Act, particularly the lack of Magisterial certification for the inventory of destroyed contraband, renders ....
The prosecution's failure to comply with mandatory statutory provisions regarding inventory preparation and certification leads to the acquittal of the accused.
The court affirmed that the Preventive Officer's testimony could substantiate a conviction under the Kerala Abkari Act, despite procedural irregularities.
Under Sec.53A(i), in order to ensure that Court can safely base their conviction, inventory should be prepared strictly in accordance with requirements of Sec.53A(2).
The mandatory requirements under Section 53A of the Abkari Act for disposal of seized articles and the certified inventory list as the primary evidence of the offence.
Procedural defects in the collection and handling of evidence undermine the prosecution's case, necessitating acquittal when the chain of custody is not established.
Legal requirements for tamper-proof collection and handling of samples from contraband liquor are essential for establishing guilt under relevant sections of the Abkari Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.