The prosecution must prove the identity and integrity of seized contraband beyond reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the specimen seal and the accused's knowledge of the concealed item.

ORDER :

1. This criminal revision petition is preferred impugning the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc)-II, Kasaragod in Crl.A.No.176 of 2008.

2. The revision petitioner herein is the 1^st accused in Crime No.161 of 2000 of the Nileshwar Police Station registered for offence punishable under Section 55(a) of the ABKARI ACT .

3. The prosecution case is that PW9, the Circle Inspector of Police, Nileshwar, and his team were conducting vehicle check duty on the National Highway in front of the Nileshwar Police Station at 9.00 a.m. on 18.08.2000. While so, at 9.30 a.m., PW9 had seen a mini lorry bearing Registration No. KL-13D-6943 coming from Kanhangad side, carrying vegetables. He caused the vehicle to stop there by giving hand signal. When the police party inspected the vehicle, they found certain height difference in the platform and when they questioned the driver and cleaner, who are accused Nos. 1 and 2, they jumped from the driver’s cabin and ran away towards the south. The police party chased them and took them into custody in front of the Nithyananda Tackies. When they were questioned, they admitted that they were transporting the spirit by making use of the secret chamber made beneath to the platform. When the police party checked the vehicle, they found a covering lid on either side of the platform, which was welded with bolts, and when they removed the bolt with the help of the workers of the nearby Nithyananda workshop and opened the lid, they found that it was a secret chamber made underneath the platform parallel to its length and breadth, and it was filled with full of spirit. The spirit was removed to 7 barrels having the capacity of 210 litres each, another barrel with the capacity of 200 ml, and a cannas having capacity of 35 litres. As PW9 was satisfied that the accused were transporting the contraband article in contravention of the provision of the ABKARI ACT and Rules, he arrested both the accused, seized contraband articles under the cover of Ext.P1 mahazar, and took a sample from it in the presence of the independent witnesses and the accused, and the articles were taken to the Police Station from where he registered Ext.P6 FIR. PW10 is the S.I. of Police, Nileshwar who conducted the investigation in this case, and after completing the investigation, PW7, another S.I. of Police laid the charge sheet.

4. The 1^st accused (revision petitioner herein) was the driver of the mini lorry and 2^nd accused was the cleaner of mini lorry. The second accused absconded and case against him was split up and re-filed as C.P. No.99/2004. The revision petitioner herein stood for trial.

5. The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Hosdurg, took cognizance of the offence in C.P.No. 66/2002. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Kasaragod. The Court of Sessions, Kasaragod made over the case to the Assistant Sessions Court, Kasaragod, for trial and disposal.

6. The trial court convicted and sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,00,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months.

7. The appellate court confirmed the conviction and sentence. Impugning the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the accused preferred this revision.

8. Before the trial court, PWs.1 to 11 were examined, Exts.P1 to P10 were marked and MOs. 1 to 6 were identified.

9. After the closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned under Section 313(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He denied the incriminating circumstances put to him. After full fledged trial, the