IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU TUESDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF MAY 2024 / 31ST VAISAKHA, 1946 CRL.A NO. 1307 OF 2014 CRIME NO.14/2010 OF Adimaly Excise Range Office, Idukki AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 12.12.2014 IN SC NO.263 OF 2013 OF II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT,THODUPUZHA ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CP NO.101 OF 2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, (MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE COURT) ADIMALI APPELLANTS: 1 SHINE AGED 42 YEARS S/O.DAMODARAN, KOVALAYIL HOUSE, VENGALLOOR KARA, KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK.

2 VIJUMON BIJUMON S/O.NARAYANAN, OOLANIYIL HOUSE, MUNIYARA KARA, KONNATHADY VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK.

3 DEVADAS ANALICKAL VEEDU, AKATHETHARA VILLAGE, PALAKKAD TALUK.

BY ADVS.

SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT:

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

SRI.G.SUDHEER.P.P THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

K.BABU, J --------------------------------------

Crl.A.No.1307 of 2014 ---------------------------------------

Dated this the 21^st day of May, 2024

J U D G M E N T

Aggrieved by the judgment dated 12.12.2014, passed by the Additional Sessions Court-II, Thodupuzha, appellants/accused Nos.1 to 3 have preferred this appeal. They have been convicted under Section 55 (a) of the Abkari Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and pay a fine of Rs.1 lakh each.

2. The prosecution case is that on 01.07.2010 at 5.40 p.m., the accused illegally transported 480 litres of spirit in vehicles bearing registration Nos.KL-7BD-903, KL-04R-9262 at Kallarkutty-Panamkutty road, in violation of the provisions of the Abkari Act.

3. After completing the investigation, final report was submitted against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 55(a), 58 and 67B of the Abkari Act before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Adimaly. The case was committed to the Sessions Court, Thodupuzha, from where it was made over to the Trial Court. On the appearance of the accused charges were framed against them for the offences referred to above. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and therefore, they came to be tried by the Trial Court for the aforesaid offences.

4. The prosecution examined PWs 1 to 9, and proved Exts.P1 to P20 and MOs. 1 to 6.

5. After the closure of the prosecution evidence, statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded. They pleaded innocence. The trial Court heard the matter under Section 232 Cr.P.C. and found evidence against the accused, and hence they were called upon to enter on their defence and adduce evidence, if any, they may have in support thereof. On the side of the defence, Exts.D1 and D2 were marked. After hearing the arguments addressed on both sides, the Trial Court convicted the appellants for the aforesaid offences and acquitted accused No.4.

6. Heard Sri.Prajeesh.N.P, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Sri.G.Sudheer, the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

7. The learned counsel for the appellants challenges the judgment of conviction and sentence on the following grounds:-

a) The prosecution failed to establish that the contraband substance allegedly seized from the place of occurrence eventually reached the Chemical Examiner’s laboratory.

b) The prosecution failed to establish the tamper- proof dispatch of the sample from the court to the laboratory.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the prosecution has established the seizure of the contraband articles from the possession of the accused.

9. The alleged seizure was effected on 01.07.2010 by the Excise Inspector attached to Narcotic Enforcement Squad, Adimaly (PW1). PW1 arrested the accused from the place of occurrence and seized various plastic cans containing spirit. 10. The properties including the sample were produced before th