Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Johnson John, J
Nallan – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant challenges prior conviction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on evidentiary inconsistencies. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. procedural requirements must be adhered. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. prosecution failed to establish evidence integrity. (Para 20) |
| 5. conviction overturned, appellant acquitted. (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT
The appellant is the accused in S.C. No. 93 of 2012 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge-III, Manjeri and he is challenging the conviction and sentence imposed on him for the offence under Section 8 (2) of the Abkari Act as per the impugned judgment dated 14.08.2014.
2. The prosecution case is that while the Excise Inspector and party were on patrol duty on 10.12.2010, and when they reached Thalappakuzhi at about 2 p.m., they saw the accused coming with a plastic can containing one litre of arrack and the accused is thereby alleged to have committed the offence under Section 8 (2) of the Abkari Act .
3. Before the trial court, when the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge, prosecution examined PWs 1 to 3 and marked Exhibits P1 to P9(a) and MO1. No evidence adduced from the side of the defence.
4. After trial and hearing both sides, the trial court found t
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
