Partly allowed

B.K. Damodaran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Oct 2016Crl.Rev.Pet/1156/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal revision petition in part. While upholding the conviction for smuggling under the Abkari Act, the trial court reduced the sentence considering the appellant's age and time spent in 2005, ordering release on surrender of any further term and allowing the fine to remain.

What did the court decide?

Release on surrender of remaining term; fine of Rs.1,00,000/- maintained.

B.K. Damodaran Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/29TH ASWINA, 1938

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1156 of 2014 ()

¶6

CRL.A 412/2010 of ADDL. D.C. & SESSIONS COURT - II, KASARAGOD SC 761/2007 of SUB COURT, HOSDRUG

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/APPELLANT/ACCUSED:

¶8

B.K. DAMODARAN

¶9

S/O.LATE KUNHAMBU, KALICHAMARAM, BALLA,KOVVAL STORE PADINHAREU, KANHANGAD VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS.SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR SRI.A.D.SURESH BABU

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA

¶13

REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 031.

¶14

THE EXCISE INSPECTOR

¶15

HOSDURG EXCISE RANGE, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT PIN.671 531.

¶16

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SHRI RAMESH CHAND

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J.

¶19

¶20

Crl.R.P. No.1156 of 2014

¶21

- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21^st day of October 2016

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The revision petitioner was concurrently found guilty

¶24

by the courts below under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act.

¶25

Heard.

¶26

Before the trial court, PW1 to PW7 were examined

¶27

and Exts.P1 to P14 were marked for the prosecution. No evidence was adduced on the side of the revision petitioner.

¶28

The courts below correctly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution and concurrently found that the revision petitioner committed

¶29

Crl.R.P.1156/2014

¶30

: 2 :

¶31

the offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act, repelling the contentions of the revision petitioner. No material has

¶32

been brought to the notice of this court to indicate that the appreciation of evidence or the concurrent finding by the courts below was perverse or incorrect. In the said circumstances, the concurrent finding by the courts below that the revision petitioner committed the offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act, does not warrant any interference by this court.

¶33

As regards the sentence, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner has pleaded for leniency. The courts below awarded a sentence of simple imprisonment for six months and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. The revision petitioner was aged 55 years

¶34

Crl.R.P.1156/2014

¶35

: 3 :

¶36

during the relevant period. Presently, he is aged 66 years. The quantity of contraband involved in this case is 25

¶37

litres. No previous conviction has been proved against the revision petitioner. The revision petitioner was in custody from 29.6.2005 to 1.11.2005 in connection with this case. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the quantiy of the contraband seized and also the age of the revision petitioner, I am inclined to modify and reduce the sentence awarded by the courts below to imprisonment to the period of detention already undergone by the revision petitioner in connection with this case and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) and in default to simple imprisonment for one month under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act, to meet the ends of justice, and accordingly, I order so.

¶38

Crl.R.P.1156/2014

¶39

: 4 :

¶40

In the result, this revision petition stands allowed in

¶41

part as above.

¶42

The revision petitioner shall surrender before the trial

¶43

court on 1.12.2016 to suffer the sentence.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR,

JUDGE

dl/24.10.2016

// True Copy //

PA to Judge

Crl.R.P.1156/2014

: 5 :

B.K. Damodaran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.K. Damodaran 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sreelal Vs the State of Kerala

Unnikrishnan Nair and Others Vs State of Kerala

Kannan and Another Vs State of Kerala

Saji, S/O.Abdul Salam Vs State of Kerala

Santhosh Vs State of Kerala

Antony Manuel Amaresh @ Jeny Vs State of Kerala