The High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging the conviction of an accused for illegal possession of illicit arrack under the Kerala Abkari Act, holding that the revision was devoid of merits.
The criminal revision petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2012/5TH MAGHA 1933
CRRP.No. 152 of 2006 ( )
CRA.162/2002 of I ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM CC.956/1998 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KOLLAM
REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED::
PAPPACHAN, S/O. SILISTAIN, CHERUPUSHPAM VEEDU, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM TALUK.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.A.NOOR MUHAMMED SRI.C.K.PRASAD
SRI.VIKANTH K.PUTHUMANA
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT::
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SEENA RAMAKRISHNAN
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-01-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
svs
P.Bhavadasan, J.
==========================
CR.RP No.152 of 2006
==========================
Dated this the 25th January 2012
Order
The accused was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Sections 55(a) and 55(i) of the Kerala Abkari Act. After trial, he was found guilty of the offence under Section 55(a). He was, therefore, convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. In appeal, the appellate court confirmed the conviction and sentence.
Cr.RP 152/06
-2-
Cr.RP 152/06
-3-
Cr.RP 152/06
-4-
The result is that this revision petition is devoid of
any merits and it is accordingly dismissed.
P.Bhavadasan, Judge.
sta
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petition is maintainable in view of the existence of merits?
Whether the findings of the courts below are perverse or unwarranted by the evidence?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
PAPPACHAN
STATE OF KERALA
P. BHAVADASAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
