The court distinguished between composition as a remedy and acquittal while affirming the legislature's intent in amending the Abkari Act to reduce penalties for certain offences.

JUDGMENT

Ravikumar, J.

The captioned writ appeals are directed against a common judgment dated 25.10.2018 in W.P.(C)Nos.16509/2018, 3969/2018, 6308/2018, 4910/2018, 4811/2018 & 3326/2016. The State of Kerala and its officers who were respondents in the writ petitions are the appellants. The respondents herein/the writ petitioners were licensees/workers of toddy shops under different groups in different Excise Ranges. The licensees were permitted to vend toddy through the respective shops up to 31.3.2018. During the currency of their licences, samples of toddy were taken from their respective shops by the competent officers and on analysis, they were found to be adulterated with foreign materials and in the admixture presence of starch was found. Consequently, crime and occurrence reports were registered against the respondents herein, prior to 21.12.2017, under Section 57 (a) of the Abkari Act , 1077. Upon registration of abkari offences against them under Section 57 (a) of the , the respective licensees were issued with show cause notices as to why licences issued to them to vend toddy, should not be cancelled.

Pending proceedings, the licences and privileges were suspended by the Deputy Commissioner concerned. Later, in terms of the provisions under Section 26 of the Abkari Act , their licences were cancelled. Still later, orders for resale of such shops were also issued. Though they approached the authorities for compounding the offences, the representations submitted therefor, were rejected. It is the said circumstances that constrained the respondents herein/writ petitioners to approach this Court by filing the above mentioned writ petitions.

2. The learned Single Judge, after considering the rival contentions set aside the impugned orders of suspension/cancellation and disposed of the writ petitions as per common judgment

25.10.2018 with the following findings and directions:-

"17. The impugned orders of suspension/cancellation of licence are therefore set aside. There will be a direction to the competent among the respondents to first consider the application for composition preferred by the petitioners in terms of Section 67A (1) of the Abkari Act and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law on the said applications. It is clear from the language of the provisions that a compounding under Section 67A would amount to absolving the accused persons of all liabilities in respect of any penal provision in terms of the or the Rules made thereunder. In the above view of the matter, the reconsideration of the issue of necessity for cancellation of licences has to 17 be made by the competent among the respondents after the application for compounding is duly considered and disposed of. In case the compounding applications preferred by the petitioners are allowed, the issue of cancellation of licences will be taken up and decided taking note of the fact that the petitioners stand absolved of all liabilities in respect of the offences alleged against them in terms of Section 57 (aa) of the Act. Needful shall be done by the respondents within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment."

(Underline supplied)

It is feeling aggrieved by the setting aside of the orders of suspension/cancellation of the licences issued to the respondents herein/writ petitioners and the further consequential findings and directions that the captioned appeals are filed.

3. Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader as also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/writ petitioners.

4. Both sides were heard at length. From the rival contentions, various points germane for consideration. In view of the commonness of the issues as also the contentions, for the purpose of disposal of the appeals, it is absolutely unnecessary for us to take note of the factual aspects involved in the individual cases. As a matter of fact, it is submitted by both sides that the factual position obtained in each of the cases need n