Against the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under section 4 (1) (i) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act by the Courts below, the above Criminal Revision has been filed. It appears from the facts of the case that the petitioner was found to have been selling arrack and was in possession of 800 ml. of arrack at Thamiravarani River bed Pillaiyar temple in Tirunelveli Junction. On suspicion, the petitioner was arrested and the 800 ml. of arrack in his possession was seized and a charge under the aforesaid section was 61ed against the petitioner.-

2. When the petitioner was questioned he denied the offence. Since the petitioner denied the offence, prosecution let in evidence to prove the offence charged under the aforesaid section. For this purpose, P.W.1, Sub-Inspector was examined. The evidence of the Sub-Inspector is to the effect that he was the Sub-Inspector of Tirunelveli Palak-karai police station. On 8th July, 1976, he charge-sheeted the petitioner under section 4 (1) (i) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act after enquiry. Thereafter the charge-sheet was laid against the petitioner. The evidence of P.W.1 is so bald and does not contain any thing to show as to whether