IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
Unaize Ahammed S/o Mukkthar Ahammed - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Kerala - Respondent
CRL.MC No. 1298 of 2026
Decided On : 20-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's jurisdiction and details of parties (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. factual allegations and surprise check details (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. defense's argument on lack of evidence (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. prosecution's rebuttal and evidence (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. court's findings on procedural compliance (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
This Crl.M.C. No. 1298/2026 has been filed by the first accused in Crime No. 04/2025/EKM of V.A.C.B, Ernakulam Unit and the prayers herein are to quash the FIR and further proceedings and also to grant such other reliefs in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused the prosecution records as well as the records produced by the petitioner.
3. In a nut shell, this crime was registered based on Annexure A2 surprise check report, carried out by the Inspector of Police- III, VACB, Ernakulam Unit as on 18.12.2024, acting on a complaint filed by Sri. Amal Krishna B, Manager FL 09 Warehouse, Petta, Thripunithura Branch, dated 18.12.2024.
4. Paragraph Nos. 3 to 9 of the report submitted by the respondent No. 4 speak of the genesis and follow up steps of the case are extracted hereunder:-
“3. A petition was submitted by Amal Krishna B, Manager FL 09 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura on 18.12.2024. The petition was acknowledged by my predecessor as per receipt no. 3001/24/ΕΚΜ. The allegation in the petition is that 1. Shri. Unaize Ahammed, Excise Circle Inspector, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura, 2. Shri. Sabu Kuriakose, Excise Preventive Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura. 3. Shri. Hareesh H, Civil Excise Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura were demanding bribe in the form of IMFL bottles as bribe for issuing permits for transporting load of IMFL bottles on trucks out of KSBC warehouse to retail outlets and bars.
4. On the basis of the petition, as ordered by Director, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, a Surprise Check No. 51/2024/EKM was jointly conducted by Sri.Santhoshkumar. V. Asst. Regional Manager, Supplyco Regional Office, Ernakulam and Sri. Ziya Ul Haq, Inspector of Police-III, Vigilance and Anti- Corruption Bureau, Ernakulam Unit, on 18.12.2024. Two bottles of IMFL was recovered from the bag of Shri. Unaize Ahammed, Excise Circle Inspector, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura(petitioner herein) and two more bottles of IMFL was recovered from the bottom portion of the office table used by Shri. Sabu Kuriakose, Excise Preventive Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura. Thus, 4 bottles of IMFL were seized. Later it was found that the liquor bottles were issued to a BEVCO outlet for supply.
5. After enquiries and post- verification, Shri. Ziya Ul Haq, Inspector of Police-III, VACB Unit, Ernakulam prepared and submitted Ext.P2 report mentioned in the petition. He reported certain irregularities in the report.
6. An F.I.R was registered on the basis of irregularities found in the Surprise Check as VC No. 04/2025/EKM U/s 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The F.I.R was registered by Sri. N.R. Jayaraj, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Ernakulum Unit on 17.02.2025, against 1. Shri. Unaize Ahammed, Excise Circle Inspector, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura, 2. Shri. Sabu Kuriakose, Excise Preventive Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura. 3. Shri. Hareesh H, Civil Excise Officer, KSBC FL-9 Warehouse, Petta, Tripunithura.
7. Investigation of the case was entrusted to Sri. Vinod. C, Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti- Corruption Bureau, Ernakulam Unit on 17.02.2025 itself.
8. It was mentioned at the preamble part of the report of Surprise Check conducted on 18.12.2024 that the Surprise Check was conducted on the basis of the petition alleging demand of bribe in the form of IMFL bottles by Excise personnel posted at Kerala State Beverage Corporation Warehouse, Tripunithura for issuing Transport
Procedural irregularities in conducting a surprise check do not justify quashing an FIR where substantial evidence of corruption exists, underscoring the need for thorough investigative proceedings.
The conviction under the Chhattisgarh Excise Act was set aside due to prosecution's failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt based on procedural violations.
The court affirmed the validity of FIRs registered by different agencies for distinct offences, emphasizing the necessity of ongoing investigations into serious allegations of corruption and money la....
The court ruled that allegations in an FIR must disclose a prima facie case for investigation, and mere recovery of cash without evidence linking the accused to a bribery transaction does not suffice....
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and inconsistent witness testimony undermines the credibility of charges under the Bihar Excise Act.
Non-compliance with statutory provisions regarding search warrants in liquor-related cases leads to quashing of FIR and subsequent proceedings.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.