Allowed

Thulasidharan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Nov 2010Crl.MC/4293/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner applied under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings under Section 56(b) of the Abkari Act. The court allowed the petition, holding that where the sole charge is excess alcohol percentage, proceedings must be quashed per the Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Unni.

What did the court decide?

Criminal prosecution (C.C. No. 513/2008) against the petitioner filed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kattakada is quashed.

Thulasidharan Vs State of Kerala — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 23RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 2ND AGRAHAYANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4293 of 2010() ------------------------CC.513/2008 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, KATTAKADA

¶4

PETITIONER(S): A1: ------------------------------

¶5

THULASIDHARAN, PRASHANTH BHAVAN, PATTAKULAM, AANAKODE MURI, VIRANAKAVU VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK.

¶6

BY ADV. SRI.R.GOPAN

¶7

RESPONDENT(S): STATE: ---------------------------------------

¶8

THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, NEDUMANGAD EXCISE RANGE, REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. P.A. SALIM

¶10

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

Kss

¶12

M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.

¶13

Crl.M.C.No.4293 of 2010

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No. 513/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kattakada, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 56(b) of Abkari Act. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that in view of the decision of the Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Unni (2007 (1) KLJ (SC) 97), as followed by this Court in Annexure-C judgment, the case against the petitioner is to be quashed. As per Annexure-A final report, the only allegation is that certificate of chemical analysis showed percentage of ethyl alcohol in excess of the prescribed limit.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard.

¶17

The charge against the petitioner is that

¶18

the sample of toddy taken from T.S.No.9/2003-04 on

¶19

CRMC 4293/10

¶20

¶21

12.9.2003, when examined at the laboratory, showed that percentage of ethyl alcohol is in excess of the prescribed limit and petitioner thereby committed an offence under Section 56(b) of Abkari Act. Annexure-B certificate of chemical analysis establishes that on analysis it was found that toddy was free from noxious ingredients injurious to health. Percentage of ethyl alcohol in the two samples forwarded was 9.20 and 8.12 by volume. As held by this Court in Annexure-C judgment, in view of the decision of the Apex Court in Unni's case (supra), when the only case is that percentage of ethyl alcohol exceeds the permissible figure, the proceedings can only be quashed.

¶22

Petition is allowed. C.C.No.513/2008 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Kattakada (Crime No.72/2003 of Nedumangadu Excise Range) is quashed.

¶23

23^rd November, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv

Thulasidharan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thulasidharan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajesh Vs State of Kerala & Another

Siddique Vs State of Kerala and Another

Sathi Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Sreekumar Vs State of Kerala

Surendran Vs Devi

Thankappan Nair Vs State of Kerala