SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ker) 98

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
Unaize Ahammed S/o Mukkthar Ahammed - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Kerala - Respondent
CRL.MC No. 1298 of 2026
Decided On : 20-02-2026 

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Sri.V.Sethunath, Shri.Thomas Abraham (K/1051/2010), Shri.Sreeganesh U., Smt.Atheesha M.V. For the Respondent: Sri. Rajesh, Speical Public Prosecutor, Smt. Rekha S., Senior Public Prosecutor

Procedural irregularities in conducting a surprise check do not justify quashing an FIR where substantial evidence of corruption exists, underscoring the need for thorough investigative proceedings.

Headnote:(A) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7, 8 - Allegations of bribery involving Excise officials - FIR resulting from a surprise check alleging illicit demand for bribes in the form of liquor - Documented procedures followed during the surprise check are upheld despite minor technical errors - Procedural irregularity in the process of investigation does not warrant quashing of FIR just based on alleged malafides of the petitioner - Courts uphold the integrity of the complaint supported by evidence of recovery of illicit items. (Paras 3-10)

Facts of the case:
The investigation was initiated based on a complaint alleging demand for bribes by excise officials, leading to the recovery of liquor bottles during a surprise check conducted on 18.12.2024. The petitioner contends that the allegations are baseless and procedural irregularities exist in the surprise check.

Findings of Court:
The Court dismissed the motion to quash the FIR, emphasizing that mere procedural irregularities do not negate the validity of evidence obtained, particularly when substantial evidence supports the allegations.

Issues: The main issues were the credibility of the surprise check conducted and whether procedural irregularities warranted quashing of the FIR.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that adherence to protocol, even with minor deviations, does not invalidate findings of corruption if the integrity of the surprise check was maintained, and the evidence presented substantiated the claims of illegal gratification.

Result: Crl.M.C. stands dismissed, allowing the investigation to proceed.

Table of Content
1. court's jurisdiction and details of parties (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. factual allegations and surprise check details (Para 4 , 5)
3. defense's argument on lack of evidence (Para 6 , 7)
4. prosecution's rebuttal and evidence (Para 8 , 9)
5. court's findings on procedural compliance (Para 10 , 11)

ORDER :

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

This Crl.M.C. No. 1298/2026 has been filed by the first accused in Crime No. 04/2025/EKM of V.A.C.B, Ernakulam Unit and the prayers herein are to quash the FIR and further proceedings and also to grant such other reliefs in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the prosecution records as well as the records produced by the petitioner.

3. In a nut shell, this crime was registered based on Annexure A2 surprise check report, carried out by the Inspector of Police- III, VACB, Ernakulam Unit as on 18.12.2024, acting on a complaint filed by Sri. Amal Krishna B, Manager FL 09 Warehouse, Petta, Thripunithura Branch, dated 18.12.2024.

4. Paragraph Nos. 3 to 9 of the report submitted by the respondent No. 4 speak of the genesis and follow up steps of the case are extracted hereunder:-

“3. A petition was submitted by Amal Krishna B, Manager FL 09 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura on 18.12.2024. The petition was acknowledged by my predecessor as per receipt no. 3001/24/ΕΚΜ. The allegation in the petition is that 1. Shri. Unaize Ahammed, Excise Circle Inspector, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura, 2. Shri. Sabu Kuriakose, Excise Preventive Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura. 3. Shri. Hareesh H, Civil Excise Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura were demanding bribe in the form of IMFL bottles as bribe for issuing permits for transporting load of IMFL bottles on trucks out of KSBC warehouse to retail outlets and bars.

4. On the basis of the petition, as ordered by Director, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, a Surprise Check No. 51/2024/EKM was jointly conducted by Sri.Santhoshkumar. V. Asst. Regional Manager, Supplyco Regional Office, Ernakulam and Sri. Ziya Ul Haq, Inspector of Police-III, Vigilance and Anti- Corruption Bureau, Ernakulam Unit, on 18.12.2024. Two bottles of IMFL was recovered from the bag of Shri. Unaize Ahammed, Excise Circle Inspector, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura(petitioner herein) and two more bottles of IMFL was recovered from the bottom portion of the office table used by Shri. Sabu Kuriakose, Excise Preventive Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura. Thus, 4 bottles of IMFL were seized. Later it was found that the liquor bottles were issued to a BEVCO outlet for supply.

5. After enquiries and post- verification, Shri. Ziya Ul Haq, Inspector of Police-III, VACB Unit, Ernakulam prepared and submitted Ext.P2 report mentioned in the petition. He reported certain irregularities in the report.

6. An F.I.R was registered on the basis of irregularities found in the Surprise Check as VC No. 04/2025/EKM U/s 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The F.I.R was registered by Sri. N.R. Jayaraj, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ernakulum Unit on 17.02.2025, against 1. Shri. Unaize Ahammed, Excise Circle Inspector, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura, 2. Shri. Sabu Kuriakose, Excise Preventive Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura. 3. Shri. Hareesh H, Civil Excise Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura.

7. Investigation of the case was entrusted to Sri. Vinod. C, Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti- Corruption Bureau, Ernakulam Unit on 17.02.2025 itself.

8. It was mentioned at the preamble part of the report of Surprise Check conducted on 18.12.2024 that the Surprise Check was conducted on the basis of the petition alleging demand of bribe in the form of IMFL bottles by Excise personnel posted at Kerala State Beverage Corporation Warehouse, Tripunithura for issuing Transport

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top