At the charge framing stage, the court assesses whether prima facie evidence exists to constitute an offence without delving into the probative value of the evidence.

O R D E R

This revision petition has been filed challenging the dismissal of an application for discharge filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner is the accused in S.C.No.530 of 2022. The offences alleged against him are punishable under Sections 55 (a), 55(i), 13 r/w 63 of the Kerala Abkari Act .

2. The prosecution allegation is that on 23.01.2022 at 1.30 p.m., the petitioner was found in illegal possession of 6.5 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (for short 'IMFL') stored in a black shoulder bag at his house named Punnakkal House for sale, in violation of the provisions of the Abkari Act. The petitioner, after appearance, filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C for discharge. The trial court, after hearing both sides, dismissed the application. This revision petition has been filed challenging the order of dismissal.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no prima facie material to attract the offences alleged against the petitioner, especially, Sections 55 (a) and 55(i) of the Abkari Act. A reading of the final report and the mahazar would show that on receiving the information that somebody was engaged in the sale of illicit arrack, the excise party reached near the house of the petitioner and seized 6.5 litres of IMFL from a shoulder bag kept on the south-western corner of the sitout of the house. The final report would show at the time of the seizure, the petitioner was standing near to it. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in order to attract the offence under Section 55 (i), there should be actual sale or intention for sale and in order to attract the offence under (a), there should be proof of illegal import, export or transport or transmit of illicit liquor which are absent in this case. Whether the petitioner was in exclusive possession of the liquor or was engaged in actual sale of liquor is a matter of evidence.

It is settled that at the time of framing charge, the inquiry must necessarily be limited to deciding if the facts emerging from the materials would constitute the offence with which the accused could be charged. It is equally settled that at the stage of framing the charge, the court is not expected to go deep into the probative value of the material on record and what need to be considered is whether there is a ground for presuming at least that the offence has been committed. There are prima facie materials and sufficient grounds to proceed with the framing of charge against him. Hence, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order.

Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is dismissed.