JUDGMENT

The appellants were convicted and sentenced by the court below under Section 8 (2) of the Abkari Act .

2.The prosecution allegation is that on

01.07.2002 at about 5.00 p.m., the appellants were found in possession of 13 packets of arrack, each packet having a capacity of 100 ml each, in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act .

3. Heard.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants has argued that since no sample seal was affixed on the copy of the forwarding note, the appellants are entitled to be acquitted.

5. The learned counsel for the appellants relied on the decision of this Court in Krishnan H. v. State [ 2015(1) KHC 822 ] to support his argument.

6. In Krishnan (supra), the Court held that the absence of sample seal at the space provided for the same in the copy of the Forwarding Note is sufficient to presume that the sample seal was not provided in the original Forwarding Note.

7. Ext.P7 is the copy of the forwarding note which does not contain the sample seal at the space provided for the same or at any other place. In this case, no evidence was adduced by the prosecution to prove that the sample seal was affixed on the copy of the forwarding note.

8. In Ravi