SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 49642

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
C.T.RAVIKUMAR, N. NAGARESH, JJ
THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – Appellant
Versus
K.SRIDHARAN S/O.KANNAN NAIR – Respondent
WA.No.2451 OF 2018 | WA.No.2452 OF 2018 | WA.No.2453 OF 2018 | WA.No.2454 OF 2018 | WA.No.2455 OF 2018 | WA.No.2456 OF 2018 | W.P(C) 3969/2018(U) | W.P(C) 16059/2018(F) | W.P(C) 6308/2018(K) | W.P(C) 4910/2018(K) | W.P(C) 4811/2018(B) | W.P(C) 3326/2018(M)



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.V.MANU, SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER
For the Respondents: ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN (SR.), ADV. SRI.JOSE JONES JOSEPH, ADV. SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE, ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN

The court held that under the Abkari Act, compositions for mixing starch with liquor are permissible post-amendments, but do not equate to acquittal and do not absolve civil liabilities.

Headnote:(A) Abkari Act, 1077 - Section 57(a) and 67A - Composition of offences - Licence cancellation - The court clarified that composition under Section 67A is permissible for offenses of mixing starch with liquor even if committed prior to the amendments made on 21.12.2017, emphasizing the principle of beneficial construction of ex post facto laws. (Paragraphs 9-10, 12-13, 24)

(B) Vedanta principles - Legislative intent - The court emphasized that amendments to the Abkari Act were intended to render amendments favorable to offenders and allow them to seek composition of offences without being subjected to harsher penalties. (Paragraphs 19-24)

(C) Discharge - The court held that composition does not amount to acquittal and does not absolve offenders from civil liabilities, thus upholding the discretion of the Commissioner regarding license cancellation. (Paragraphs 20-22)

Facts of the case:
The judgment arose from appeals against a common judgment setting aside the cancellation of licenses due to abkari offences of mixing starch with toddy, highlighting that earlier violations came under an outdated statute.

Findings of Court:
The court allowed appeals in part, affirming the need for composition and that penalties can be reduced for actions taken before legislative changes, while clarifying the differentiation between 'discharge' and 'acquittal'.

Issues: Key issues included whether prior occurrences could invoke newer, less severe laws post-amendment and the implications of composition on civil liabilities.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the composition of offences could proceed under amended law but does not equate to an acquittal, and penalties must still adhere to civil law despite composition.

Result: Appeals allowed in part, with directions for reconsideration regarding civil liabilities and license cancellations.

Table of Content
1. background on the original writ petitions and grounds for appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. appellants' arguments regarding the application of the abkari act and amendments. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. constitutional considerations and implications of ex post facto laws. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. discussion on the impact of compounding offences under the abkari act. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
5. clarification of civil liabilities and licensing issues post-compounding. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
6. final thoughts on relief and future considerations in licensing. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)

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 , 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 direc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top