The High Court of Kerala acquitted the appellant in a criminal appeal. The single judicial witness was unsupported by any other police testimony, creating a grave suspicion that the conviction could not stand.
The conviction and sentence passed by the court below are set aside and the appellant is acquitted.
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 B.KEMAL PASHA
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/25TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938
CRL.A.No. 270 of 2009 ( )
SC 213/2006 of ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT (ADHOC)-II, THODUPUZHA
APPELLANT/ACCUSED:
BENNY, S/O. JOSEPH, ANDUKUNNEL VEEDU, KANNIMALA BHAGAM, ANAVILASAM KARA, KUMILY VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.K.J.JOSEMON
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
BY SR.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.HRITHWIK C.S.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
DSV/17/12/16
B. KEMAL PASHA, J
=================
Crl.Appeal No.270 of 2009
=================
Dated this the 16th day of December, 2016
The appellant is the accused in Sessions Case No.213 of 2006 of the IV Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-II), Thodupuzha, who stands convicted under Section 63 of the Abkari Act and sentenced to pay a fine of `5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.
at 6.00 p.m., the appellant was found engaged in selling Indian Made Foreign Liquor at a place called Kallumedu in Chenkara Kara, in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act.
Crl.A.No.270 of 2009
2
and seized a bottle containing 400 ml of Indian Made Foreign Liquor held by the appellant through ExhibitP1 mahazar. He seized two other bottles, which also contained Indian Made Foreign Liquor, which were in a big shopper placed near the appellant. He registered Exhibit-P4 First Information Report and produced the properties before court through Exhibit-P5 property list. Forwarding note was furnished, the copy of which is Exhibit-P6. PW3, Sub Inspector of Police, conducted the investigation and filed the Final Report on getting Exhibit-P3 certificate of chemical analysis.
Crl.A.No.270 of 2009 3
and the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.
Crl.A.No.270 of 2009
4
PW1 and PW2 had turned hostile to the prosecution, the prosecution ought to have examined at least one more witness from the Police party to corroborate the versions of PW4. The prosecution has not examined any such person to corroborate the versions of PW4. In a case like this, it is not at all safe to rely on the solitary evidence of PW4 and to take it as gospel truth to convict the appellant, especially when the prosecution could have adduced other evidence to corroborate the testimony of PW4. Matters being so, this Court is of the view that the conviction and sentence passed by the court below are liable to be set aside.
In the result, this Crl.Appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence passed by the court below are set aside. The appellant is acquitted.
Sd/B. KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE.
DSV/17/12/16
// True Copy //
P.A. To Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the solitary testimony of PW4 without corroboration from other police witnesses is sufficient to sustain a conviction.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Benny
State of Kerala
B. Kemal Pasha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
