Partly allowed

T.Kallyani v. Excise Inspector,Hosdurg Excise Range

Kerala HC19 Oct 2012Crl.Rev.Pet/518/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In the High Court of Kerala, Justice S. Siri Jagan heard a criminal revision petition challenging conviction and sentence for an Abkari Act offence. The court modified the imprisonment sentence to the time already undergone but upheld the fine.

What did the court decide?

Sentence of imprisonment reduced to period already suffered; fine of Rs. 1 lakh upheld with one month to pay or face three months' simple imprisonment.

T.Kallyani Vs Excise Inspector,Hosdurg Excise Range — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/27TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 518 of 2004

¶6

CRA.245/2000 of ADDL.SESSN.COURT (ADHOC-II)KASARAGODE SC.221/1999 of SUB COURT, HOSDRUG

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED.:

¶8

T.KALLYANI, W/O.KURIYAN, UPPILAKKARI, P.O.UPPILAKKAI, HOSDURG TALUK.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.M.THAMBAN SMT.T.SUDHAMANI

¶10

COMPLAINANT(S)/COMPLAINANT AND STATE.:

¶11

1. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, HOSDURG EXCISE RANGE.

¶12

2. THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. SEENA RAMAKRISHNAN

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

S. Siri Jagan, J.

¶16

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Crl. R.P. No. 518 of 2004

¶17

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 19^th day of October, 2012.

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner is the accused in S.C. No. 221/1999 before the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Hosdurg. The petitioner was prosecuted for offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. The Assistant Sessions Judge convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh with a default sentence of 2 months' simple imprisonment. The petitioner challenged the same before the Additional Sessions Judge (Ad Hoc-II), Kasaragod in Crl. A. No. 245/2000. The Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and sentence. The petitioner is challenging the judgments of the courts below.

¶20

After arguing for some time, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner confines relief for reduction of the substantive sentence of imprisonment. The petitioner submits that she is a lady aged 60 years and hence a lenient view may be taken.

¶21

I have heard learned Public Prosecutor also on this point.

¶22

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to modify the sentence of imprisonment. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment is confined to the detention already suffered by the petitioner prior to the trial. But, the fine would

¶23

Crl. R.P. No. 518 of 2004 -: 2 :-

¶24

stand. If the fine is not paid within one month, the petitioner shall undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

¶25

The Criminal R.P. is disposed of as above.

¶26

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

¶27

Tds/

¶28

[True copy]

¶29

P.S to Judge.

T.Kallyani v. Excise Inspector,Hosdurg Excise Range

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Kallyani v. Excise Inspector,Hosdurg Excise Range

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Karunakaran Vs State of Kerala

Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Fathima K Vs Manoj Mv

Babeesh Vs the Managing Director, Sidco

V.a.Sobhanakumari Vs Smt.Roopakala Jagath

Pavithran Vs State of Kerala