Allowed

C.v.Damodharan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Oct 2018WP(C)/4910/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed six writ petitions challenging cancellation of toddy shop licenses for mixing starch with toddy. The Court held that the 2017 amendment rendering the offense compoundable applies retrospectively. It directed authorities to consider compounding applications, noting that if compounded, licenses cannot be cancelled, but if not, cancellation may proceed. Impugned order

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders of suspension/cancellation of licenses set aside. Direction to respondents to consider applications for composition under Section 67A(1) and decide on necessity of cancellation thereaf

C.v.Damodharan Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 3969 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

K.SRIDHARAN

¶8

AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.KANNAN NAIR, KURUMANNIL HOUSE, PAYYOLI VILLAGE, KIZHOOR DESOM, KOYILANDI THALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN (SR.) SRI.JOSE JONES JOSEPH

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 EXCISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695033.

¶12

2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶13

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER B.VINOD

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.7.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C).16059/2018, WP(C).6308/2018, WP(C).4910/2018, WP(C).4811/2018, WP(C).3326/2018, THE COURT 25.10.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶17

PRESENT

¶18

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶19

THURSDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶20

WP(C).No. 16059 of 2018

¶21

PETITIONER/S:

¶22

K.V.VISWANATHAN

¶23

AGED 54, S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, KULANGARAKANDI HOUSE,MELMURINGODI P.O., IRITTY TALUK,KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670673

¶24

BY ADVS. SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE SRI.E.R.ANIL (A-1873)

¶25

RESPONDENT/S:

¶26

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, EXCISE DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001

¶27

2 COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE KERALA BAKERY JUNCTION RD, NANDAVANAM,PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033

¶28

3 DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER WAYANAD, MEENANGADI-673122

¶29

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER B.VINOD

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.7.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C).6308/2018, WP(C).4910/2018, WP(C).4811/2018, WP(C).3969/2018, WP(C).3326/2018, THE COURT ON 25.10.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

¶32

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶35

THURSDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶36

WP(C).No. 6308 of 2018

¶37

PETITIONER/S:

¶38

1 T.H.RAJAN AGED 54 YEARS, S/O KUMARAN, KOYILOTH MEETHALHOUSE, VADAKARA VILLAGE, VADAKARA TALUK,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶39

2 G.PRABHAKARAN AGED 59 YEARS, S/O RAMMUNI, VALLIYA KAYYIL HOUSE, NADAKUTHAZHA VILLAGE, PUTHUPANNAN,VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶40

BY ADVS.

¶41

SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN (SR.) SRI.JOSE JONES JOSEPH

¶42

RESPONDENT/S:

¶43

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶44

REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENTOF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN:695001.

¶45

2 EXCISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695033.

¶46

3 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶47

4 EXCISE INSPECTOR EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, VADAKARA-673101KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶48

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER B.VINOD

¶49

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.7.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C).16059/2018, WP(C).4910/2018, WP(C).4811/2018, WP(C).3969/2018, WP(C).3326/2018, THE COURT ON 25.10.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶50

¶51

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶52

PRESENT

¶53

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶54

THURSDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶55

WP(C).No. 4910 of 2018

¶56

PETITIONER/S:

¶57

1 C.V.DAMODHARAN S/O.AMBADI,THATTUMMAL EZHAMMAYIL HOUSE, ADENGANAM, KODOM VILLAGE,VALLARIKUNDU TALUK.

¶58

2 SHAJI E.K. AGED 45 YEARS S/O. .V.KARUNAKARAN, ERIYADOTH ELAVAMKUNNEL HOUSE,PULLUR VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶59

BY ADVS.

¶60

SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶61

RESPONDENT/S:

¶62

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY TIS SECRETARY,TAXES(A) DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT,THRIVUANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶63

2 THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶64

3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIOER OF EXCISE KASARAGOD-673 001

¶65

4 THE EXCISE INSPECTOR HOSDURG EXCISE RANGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 315.

¶66

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER B.VINOD

¶67

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.7.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C).16059/2018, WP(C).6308/2018, WP(C).4811/2018, WP(C).3969/2018, WP(C).3326/2018, THE COURT ON 25.10.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶68

¶69

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶70

PRESENT

¶71

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶72

THURSDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶73

WP(C).No. 4811 of 2018

¶74

PETITIONER/S:

¶75

1 RAJAN T.V. AGED 70 YEARS

¶76

S/O. AMBOONI, KOTTUMPURAM DESOM, NEELESWARAM VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶77

2 T.K.MUKUNDAN

¶78

AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. KUTTAPPAN, PATTENADESOM, PEROL VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶79

3 K.SUKUMARAN S/O.V.V.AMBOONJI, PALLIKKARA DESOM, NEELESWARAM VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶80

BY ADVS.SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN

¶81

SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

¶82

RESPONDENT/S:

¶83

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES [A] DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶84

2 THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 659 033.

¶85

3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE KASARAGOD 673 001.

¶86

4 THE EXCISE INSPECTOR NEELESWARAM EXCISE RANGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, 673 572.

¶87

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER B.VINOD

¶88

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.7.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C).16059/2018, WP(C).6308/2018, WP(C).4910/2018, WP(C).3969/2018, WP(C).3326/2018, THE COURT ON 25.10.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶89

¶90

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶91

PRESENT

¶92

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶93

THURSDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1940

¶94

WP(C).No. 3326 of 2018

¶95

PETITIONER/S:

¶96

V.P.ASOKAN

¶97

S/O.PERAVAKUTTY, AGED 62 YEARS, DEEPAK NIVAS, KARANTHOOR P.O.,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673571.

¶98

BY ADVS.

¶99

SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI

¶100

RESPONDENT/S:

¶101

1 COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

¶102

OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695033.

¶103

2 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE CIVIL STATION (P.O), KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶104

3 EXCISE CIRCLE INSPECTOR CIVIL STATION (P.O), KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶105

4 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TAXES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶106

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER B.VINOD

¶107

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.7.2018, ALONG WITH WP(C).16059/2018, WP(C).6308/2018, WP(C).4910/2018, WP(C).4811/2018, WP(C).3969/2018, THE COURT ON 25.10.2018 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶108

¶109

C.R'

¶110

ANU SIVARAMAN, J.

¶111

W.P(C).Nos. 3326, 3969, 4811, 4910, 6308 and 16059 of 2018

¶112

Dated this the 25^th day of October, 2018 JUDGMENT

¶113

The issue raised for consideration in these writ petitions is with regard to compounding of an offence of mixing of starch with toddy. The parties and documents are being referred to in this judgment as arrayed in W.P(C).No.3969 of 2018 which is taken as the leading case.

¶114

The petitioner was a licencee of toddy shop Nos.11, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 26 of Group No.111 in Vadakara range for the period upto 31.3.2018. It is submitted that a crime and occurrence report dated 15.8.2017 had been registered against the petitioner. It is stated that a sample of toddy taken from the petitioner's shop on 15.4.2017 revealed the presence of starch mixed with toddy. It is stated that Exhibits P16 and P17 applications preferred by an employee in the shop of the petitioner had been rejected and Exhibit P14 order of cancellation of licence in respect of the toddy shops had been issued on 1.1.2018 on the allegation that the toddy had been found to be adulterated with foreign material. Exhibit P15 order directing resale of the shops was also issued which is under challenge in the writ petition.

¶115

The contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is that the mixing of starch with toddy is a minor offence and cannot entail

¶116

¶117

cancellation of licence in terms of Section 26 of the Abkari Act (for short, 'the Act'). It is stated that by the amendment brought about in Sections 57(a) and 67A of the Act, the mixing of starch with toddy, even if such mixing is admitted, has been made a minor offence by taking it out of the ambit of the more serious offences. Compounding is also enabled in such cases after the amendment. It is therefore contended that even though the offence in these cases was committed before the amendment to Section 57(a) and Section 67A of the Act, the application preferred for compounding is liable to be considered and the cancellation of licence is completely unjustified and illegal.

¶118

A detailed counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2^nd respondent. It is stated therein that the offence of mixing of starch with toddy had been detected in all these cases before the amendment was effected in the Act with effect from 21.12.2017. It is stated that the offence of mixing foreign materials with toddy was an offence punishable under Section 57(a) of the Act at the time when the offence was committed and detected. It is stated that the provision for compounding of the offence has come into effect only with effect from 21.12.2017. It is stated that therefore the application for compounding under Section 67A could not be considered, since the offence was committed before the date on which the offence was made compoundable.

¶119

Relying on Section 320 Cr.P.C, the learned Government Pleader would contend that compounding of an offence is not a right available to

¶120

¶121

any person and that what is contemplated is only an application by the petitioner. It is stated that in these cases, final reports have been filed before court and that in the said circumstances, compounding is possible only with the permission of the court. It is stated that the State cannot be directed to compound any offence and the appropriate consideration has to result in each case on the merits thereof. Relying on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Sanjayan v. Tahsildar [2002 KHC 1882], the learned Government Pleader submits that the effect of compounding an offence is that the accused admits his liability and seeks to avoid the penal consequences of the same. It is submitted that the compounding of an offence under Section 57(aa) as provided in Section 67A would only absolve the petitioners of the liability for facing prosecution for the said offence. It is therefore contended that the cancellation of licences and the decision to re-auction the shops would remain unaffected by any compounding of the offence, even if it were to be accepted. The learned Government Pleader therefore contends that the compounding of the offence would be of no consequence whatsoever for the purpose of consideration of the issue of cancellation or suspension of licence. Relying on the decision of the Apex Court in Union of India and another v. Banwari Lal Agarwal [(1998)7 SCC 652], it is contended that an enabling provision for compounding cannot give a right to a party to insist that the authority should make an offer for compounding before prosecution is launched.

¶122

¶123

The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would, on the other hand, rely on the decisions of the Apex Court in Rayala Corporation (P) Ltd. v. Director of Enforcement, New Delhi [1970 KHC 664], T.Barai v. Henry Ah Hoe and Another [1983 KHC 415], Kolhapur Canesugar Works Ltd v. Union of India [2000 KHC 995], General Finance Co. and another v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Punjab [(2002) 7 SCC 1], Basheer v. State of Kerala [2004 KHC 540] and State of Kerala v. Unni [2007(1) KLT 151].

¶124

The contentions raised by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners are (1) amendment which is clarificatory in nature has necessarily be retroactive in operation; (2) once the rigour of the penal provision is relaxed by a later amendment, the said relaxation has to be taken into consideration for the purpose of determining whether it would be an adequate ground for cancellation of a licence already granted; and (3) the filing of final reports before court at a time when the rejection of the applications for compounding are already under challenge before this Court, would have no effect and cannot be relied upon to deny the benefit of Section 67A of the Act to the petitioners herein.

¶125

The decisions of this Court in Balu v. State of Kerala [2007(1) KLT 401], Mathew N.J. v. State of Kerala and Others [2011(2) KHC 835], Muraleedharan v. State of Kerala [2011(1) KLT 886], Sivapalan v. RTO, Kollam [1996 KHC 374] and Santhosh and Another v. State of Kerala and Others [2015(5) KHC 198 (DB)] are

¶126

¶127

also relied on by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners in these cases to contend that adding of starch to toddy is not so serious offence as to entail cancellation of licences on that ground. The effect of compounding of an offence has been discussed in Sivapalan's and Mathew N.J's cases (supra) and it has been found that the effect of compounding is that it operates as a complete bar to any further proceedings as if the offender had been acquitted. It is held in Mathew N.J's case (supra) that there is nothing in Section 68 of the Forest Act, 1961, which takes away the power of an officer to compound an offence even when the case is pending before a court.

¶128

I have considered the contentions advanced at considerable length. It is clear that the issue has to be considered taking note of the specific language employed in the Statute in question. Section 57(a) and 57(aa) of the Abkari Act reads as follows:

¶129

“ 57. For adulteration, etc. by licensed vendor or manufacturer.- Whoever being the holder of a license for the sale or manufacture of liquor or of any intoxicating drug under this Act,

¶130

(a) mixes or permits to be mixed with the liquor or intoxicating drug, sold or manufactured by him, any drug, other than a noxious drug or any ingredient, other than starch likely to add to its actual or apparent intoxicating quality or strength, or any article prohibited other than an article which the Government shall deem to be noxious by any rule made under Section 29, clause (k), when such admixture shall not amount to the offence of adulteration under section 272 of

¶131

¶132

the Indian Penal Code.

¶133

(aa) mixes or permits to be mixed with starch in the liquor sold or manufactured by him; or

¶134

(b) ….

¶135

(c) ….

¶136

(d) ….

¶137

shall, on conviction before a competent court, be punished,(i) for the offences, other than an offence falling under clause (aa), with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years or with fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees or with both;

¶138

(ii) for an offence falling under clause (aa), with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees.”

¶139

By amendment in 2017, Section 57(a) was amended by

¶140

substituting the words “any ingredient” with the words “any ingredient, other than starch”. Section 57(aa) was inserted in the Act which reads, “mixes or permits to be mixed with starch in the liquor sold or manufactured by him” and the penalty in respect of the offence falling under Section 57(aa) was reduced as imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine which shall not be less than Rs.25,000/-. Section 67A was also amended by adding an entry “mixing starch with liquor” in the table and fixing Rs.25,000/- as the compounding fee for the same.

¶141

The contention of the petitioners is that with the reduction of the penalty and the taking away of the offence from the scope of the serious offences of mixing other noxious and dangerous materials with toddy and making it an independently less serious offence, the

¶142

¶143

prosecution launched against the petitioners has been rendered unnecessary. It is stated that though the offence in these cases was detected on dates prior to the amendment, since the amendment made the offence compoundable, their applications for compounding were liable to be considered in accordance with law as it stood at the time when the applications were submitted. It is further contended that the cancellation of licences on the ground that starch had been found to be mixed with toddy is completely unwarranted in view of the amendment brought about in Section 57 of the Act.

¶144

The contra contention of the learned Government Pleader is that the compounding of an offence is not the right of any party and all that can be directed, at best, is the consideration of an application for compounding by the competent authority in cases where final reports have not been laid and the consideration of such requests with the permission of the court in cases where final reports have been filed before court. It is contended that even if the compounding is allowed in favour of the petitioners, that can make no difference to the cancellation of the licences on the basis of the detection of offence, since compounding amounts to admission of guilt and forecloses only prosecution of the offence and cannot absolve the offender from the other consequences for such commission or omission.

¶145

The decisions of this Court as well as the Apex Court, which have been placed before me, would show that what is to be looked into is

¶146

¶147

the language of the compounding provision. Section 67A of the Act is an enabling provision, which reads as follows:

¶148

“ 67A. Power to compound offences.- (1) The Commissioner of Excise or the Deputy Commissioner of Excise of the District concerned or any Abkari Officer specially empowered by the Government in this behalf by notification in the Gazette, may accept, from any person reasonably suspected of having committed any of the offences specified in column (1), a sum of money as specified in column (3) of the Table below by way of composition for the offence which may have been committed and where any property has been seized, the same shall be confiscated to Government or disposed of in such manner as may be prescribed.

¶149

(2) Where any case involving an offence specified under subsection (1) is pending before a court of law, such offence may be compounded with the permission of such court and a report of the action taken thereon shall be filed before the court.

¶150

(3) On payment of such sum of money or such value or both, as the case may be, to such officer empowered for the purpose under sub-section (1), the accused person, if in custody, shall be discharged.”

¶151

It is not in dispute before me that the power to compound under

¶152

Section 67A is a discretionary power. Section 67A only enables the empowered officer to consider an application for compounding. In cases where cases are pending trial before a court of law, such application has to be considered with the permission of the court. At the time when the offence was committed, the offence of mixing starch with toddy was an offence under Section 57(a) and was not compoundable in nature.

¶153

¶154

However, by the amendment to the Abkari Act, 2017, the offence of maxing starch with toddy has been taken away by the ambit of Section 57(a) and has been included Section 57(aa) and has been made compoundable under Section 67A.

¶155

The Government in its wisdom has found that the mixing of starch with toddy need not be included with the serious offences of mixing other foreign ingredients with toddy and has given offence a separate status which does not entail as serious punishment. It is therefore clear that the request made by the petitioners for compounding of offence is liable to be considered even though the offences were committed at a time when they were not compoundable offences in terms of Section 67A. The applications for compounding therefore will have to be considered by the appropriate authority in each case. The filing of a final report after the writ petitions in each of these cases has been admitted will not stand in the way of the consideration of the application for compounding in terms of Section 67A(1). It is so directed.

¶156

With regard to the contention that the compounding would only entail the absolving of the petitioners from the liability of facing criminal prosecution and that such compounding will not have any effect on the action for cancellation of licences is, according to me, a highly misconceived argument. Section 26 of the Act provides power for recall of licences. Breach by the holder of the licenses or permission is a ground on which a licence can be suspended or cancelled. It is clear from the

¶157

¶158

orders of cancellation of licence issued in these cases that the commission of offence under Section 57(a) is what has weighed with the respondents in coming to the conclusion that the licence is liable to be suspended. The necessity for suspension of a licence in case of detection of a lesser offence in terms of Section 57(aa) would evidently not have been considered by the respondents in view of the fact that the amendment was later in point of time to the commission of offence. Since the amendment has reduced the rigour of penalty for the offence, I am of the opinion that, that is an issue which has to be independently considered by the authority while taking a decision on the necessity or otherwise or cancellation of licences. The impugned orders, which had not considered the legal effect of the amendment and the introduction of Section 57(aa), are therefore not sustainable.

¶159

The impugned orders of suspension/cancellation of licence are therefore set aside. There will be a direction to the competent among the respondents to first consider the application for composition preferred by the petitioners in terms of Section 67A(1) of the Abkari Act and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law on the said applications. It is clear from the language of the provisions that a compounding under Section 67A would amount to absolving the accused persons of all liabilities in respect of any penal provision in terms of the Abkari Act or the Rules made thereunder. In the above view of the matter, the reconsideration of the issue of necessity for cancellation of licences has to

¶160

¶161

be made by the competent among the respondents after the application for compounding is duly considered and disposed of. In case the compounding applications preferred by the petitioners are allowed, the issue of cancellation of licences will be taken up and decided taking note of the fact that the petitioners stand absolved of all liabilities in respect of the offences alleged against them in terms of Section 57(aa) of the Act. Needful shall be done by the respondents within a period of two

¶162

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶163

The writ petitions are ordered accordingly.

¶164

Sd/-

¶165

ANU SIVARAMAN

¶166

JUDGE

¶167

vgs

¶168

¶169

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3969/2018

¶170

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶171

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT DATED 15.08.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE ASSISTANT EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, VADAKARA RANGE IN CRIME NO.182/2017 BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, VADAKARA.
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT DATED 15.08.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE ASSISTANT EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, VADAKARA RANGE IN CRIME NO.181/2017 IN RELATION TO TODDY SHOP NO.25/16-17 BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT VADAKARA.
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION BEARING CMP NO.7622/2017 DATED 28.9.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXCISE CRIME NO.182/17 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, VADAKARA.
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE DIARY EXTRACT IN RELATION TO PROCEEDINGS ON EXT. P3 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, VADAKARA.
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION BEARING NO.7621/2017 DATED 28.9.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXCISE CRIME NO.181/17 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, VADAKARA.
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE DIARY EXTRACT IN RELATION TO PROCEEDINGS ON EXT.P5 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE, VADAKARA
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE ON 21ST OF DECEMBER 2017 IN RESPECT OF THE ORDINANCE NUMBER 38 PROMULGATED BY THE GOVERNOR OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE TODDY SHOP LICENSE OF TODDY SHOP BEARING TS NUMBER 11 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WHICH STOOD RENEWED UP TO 31.3.2018.

¶172

¶173

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3969/2018

¶174

EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE TODDY SHOP LICENSE OF TODDY SHOP BEARING TS NUMBER 14 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WHICH STOOD RENEWED UP TO 31.3.2018. EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE TODDY SHOP LICENSE OF TODDY SHOP BEARING TS NUMBER 15 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WHICH STOOD RENEWED UP TO 31.3.2018. EXHIBIT P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE TODDY SHOP LICENSE OF TODDY SHOP BEARING TS NUMBER 16 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WHICH STOOD RENEWED UP TO 31.3.2018. EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE TODDY SHOP LICENSE OF TODDY SHOP BEARING TS NUMBER 17 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WHICH STOOD RENEWED UP TO 31.3.2018. EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE TODDY SHOP LICENSE OF TODDY SHOP BEARING TS NUMBER 25 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER WHICH STOOD RENEWED UP TO 31.3.2018. EXHIBIT P14 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. EXC/5693/2017 XA DATED 01.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.D35718/2017 (6) DATED 12.01.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P16 A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 17.2.2018 SUBMITTED UNDER SECTION 67A OF THE ABKARI ACT ACT BY THE PETITIONER AND THE SALES MAN OF THE TODDY SHOP SEEKING COMPOUNDING OF THE OFFENCE INVOLVED IN CRIME NO.181/2017. EXHIBIT P17 A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 17.2.2018 SUBMITTED UNDER SECTION 67A OF THE ABKARI ACT BY THE PETITIONER AND THE SALES MAN OF THE TODDY SHOP SEEKING COMPOUNDING OF THE OFFENCE INVOLVED IN CRIME NO.182/2017. EXHIBIT P18 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 19.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF EXCISE RANGE, VADAKARA IN RELATION TO SAMPLE B IN CRIME NO.181/2017.

¶175

¶176

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3969/2018

¶177

EXHIBIT P19 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 19.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF EXCISE RANGE, VADAKARA IN RELATION TO SAMPLE B IN CRIME NO.182/2017.

¶178

EXHIBIT P20 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.D5795/2018 DATED 20.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO CRIME NO.181/2017.

¶179

EXHIBIT P21 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.D5794/2018 DATED 20.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO CRIME NO,182/2017.

¶180

EXHIBIT P22 A TRUE COPY OF THE WP(C) NO.3326/2018 DATED 28.01.2018 (WITHOUT EXHIBITS) FILED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶181

EXHIBIT P23 A TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 31.01.2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.3326/2018.

¶182

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶183

EXHIBIT R2 (A). TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 13.07.2017

¶184

EXHIBIT R4 A A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING "A" SAMPLE IN CR.NO.155/17.

¶185

EXHIBIT R4 B A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING "A" SAMPLE IN CR.NO.59/17.

¶186

EXHIBIT R4 C A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING "A" SAMPLE IN CR.NO.147/17.

¶187

EXHIBIT R4 D A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING CR.NO.147/17.

¶188

¶189

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16059/2018

¶190

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶191

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE LICENSE NO.WT-4/14-15 ISSUED BY TO THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF TODDY SHOP NO.4/2014-15 PUZHAMUDI IN GROUP NO.I OF KALPETTA EXCISE RANGE

¶192

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT DATED 31.08.2017 ISSUED FROM THE REGIONAL CHEMICAL EXAMINERS LABORATORY, KOZHIKODE. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EXC.1804/2018/XA-8 DATED 09.05.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 11.05.2018 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUDICIAL EXHIBIT P1MAGISTRATE COURT, KALPETTA IN CRIME NO.18/2018 OF KALPETTA EXCISE RANGE TO SEND THE B SAMPLE FOR THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

¶193

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDINANCE 38 OF 2017 PUBLISHED AS NOTIFICATION NO.25352/LEG.A1/2017/LAW DATED 21.12.2017 IN THE KERALA GAZETTE.

¶194

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDINANCE NO.4 OF 2018 PUBLISHED AS NOTIFICATION NO.25352/LEG.A1/2017/LAW DATED 12.02.2018 IN THE KERALA GAZETTE.

¶195

¶196

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6308/2018

¶197

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶198

EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT DATED 15.8.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO.181/2017 IN RELATION TO TODDY SHOP NO.25/16-17 BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, VADAKARA. EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT DATED 15.8.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN CRIME NO.182/2017 BEFORE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT VADAKARA. EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY BEARING NO.VR2/17 DATED 19.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, VADAKARA TO THE IST PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY BEARING NO.VR2/17 (1) DATED 19.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, VADAKARA TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.D35718/2017 (6) DATED 12.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED IN THE KERALA GAZETTE ON 21ST DECEMBER 2017 IN RELATION TO THE ORDINANCE NUMBER 38 PROMULGATED BY THE GOVERNOR OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P7: A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 17.2.2018 SUBMITTED UNDER SECTION 67A OF THE ABKARI ACT BY THE IST PETITIONER AND THE LICENSEE OF THE TODDY SHOP SEEKING COMPOUNDING OF THE OFFENCE INVOLVED IN CRIME NO.181/2017 OF VADAKARA EXCISE RANGE. EXHIBIT P8: A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 17.2.2018 SUBMITTED UNDER SECTION 67A OF THE ABKARI ACT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE 2ND PETITIONER AND THE LICENSEE OF THE TODDY SHOP SEEKING COMPOUNDING OF THE OFFENCE INVOLVED IN CRIME NO.182/2017 OF VADAKARA EXCISE RANGE.

¶199

¶200

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6308/2018

¶201

EXHIBIT P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.D5795/2018 DATED 20.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO CRIME NO.181/2017. EXHIBIT P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.D5794/2018 DATED 20.2.2018 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN RELATION TO CRIME NO.182/2017. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶202

EXHIBIT R1 NIL EXHIBIT R2 NIL EXHIBIT R3 NIL EXHIBIT R4 NIL EXHIBIT R4 A A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING "A" SAMPLE IN CR NO.155/17 EXHIBIT R4 B A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING "A" SAMPLE IN CR NO.59/17 EXHIBIT R4 C A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING "A" SAMPLE IN CR NO.147/17 EXHIBIT R4 D A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING CR NO.147/17

¶203

¶204

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4910/2018

¶205

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶206

EXHIBIT.P1	PHOTOCOPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT IN CR.NO.162/2017 REGISTERED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2	PHOTOCOPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS CERTIFICATE DATED 18.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE ASST.CHEMICAL EXAMINER TO GOVT. OF KERALA, KOZHIKODE.
EXHIBIT P3	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDINANCE NO.38/2017 ISSUED BY THE GOVT.OF KERALA
EXHIBIT P4	PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 20/1/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.KS5-195/2018 DATED 1.2.2018 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT.P1	PHOTOCOPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT IN CR.NO.162/2017 REGISTERED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2	PHOTOCOPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS CERTIFICATE DATED 18.11.2016 ISSUED BY THE ASST.CHEMICAL EXAMINER TO GOVT. OF KERALA, KOZHIKODE.
EXHIBIT P3	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDINANCE NO.38/2017 ISSUED BY THE GOVT.OF KERALA
EXHIBIT P4	PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 20/1/2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P5	PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.KS5-195/2018 DATED 1.2.2018 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶207

¶208

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4811/2018

¶209

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶210

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE CRIME AND OCCURRENCE REPORT IN CR.NO.123/2017 REGISTERED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2. COPY FOT HE CHEMICAL ANALYSYS CERTIFICATE DATED 25.7.17 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT CHEMICAL EXAMINER TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, KOZHIKODE. EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE ORDINANCE NO. 38/2017 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 20.1.18 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K55-196/2018 DATED 1.2.18 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶211

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶212

EXHIBIT R4 A A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING A SAMPLE IN CR NO. 155/17 EXHIBIT R4 B A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING A SAMPLE IN CR NO. 59/17 EXHIBIT R4 C A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING A SAMPLE IN CR NO. 147/17 EXHIBIT R4 D A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING A SAMPLE IN CR NO. 147/17

¶213

¶214

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3326/2018

¶215

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶216

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE CR NO.59/2017 DATED 29.4.2017 PERTAINING TO TS NO.4/16-17 KARAPARAMBU.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE CR NO.155/2017 PERTAINING TO TS NO.9/16-17 MEDICAL COLLEGE.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF CR NO.147/17 PERTAINING TO TS NO.17/17-18 THIRUTHIYADU.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING NO.EXC/6607/17/XA8 DATED 16.1.2018.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF ORDINANCE NO.38/2017 PUBLISHED IN EXTRA ORDINARY KERALA GAZETTE VOL.VI BEARING NO.2791 DATED 21.12.2017.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 21.3.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT REGARDING CRNO.59/17.
EXHIBIT P6(A)	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23.1.2018 PERTAINING TO CR NO.155/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6(B)	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23.1.2018 PERTAINING TO TS NO.17 TO THE KOZHIKODE EXCISE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER IN CR NO.147/2017.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FORWARDED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY PROCEEDINGS NO.KRO2/17 DATED 23.1.2018.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.D5-327/2018 DATED 25.1.2018.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF ADVERTISEMENT FOR CONDUCTING AUCTION OF THE ABOVE REFERRED TODDY SHOPS ON 8.2.2018.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL LICENSE ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF EXTENSION UPTO 31/3/2017 AS REGARDS TS NO. 6/2015-16, MALAPARAMBU

¶217

¶218

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3326/2018

¶219

EXHIBIT P10 A

¶220

TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL LICENSE ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF EXTENSION UPTO 31/3/2018 AS REGARDS TS NO. 8/2015-16, KOVIR.

¶221

EXHIBIT P10 B ORIGINAL LICENSE ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF EXTENSION UPTO 31.3.2017 AS REGARDS TS.NO.18/2015 -16,CHEVARAMBALAM. EXHIBIT P10 C TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL LICENSE ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF EXTENSION UPTO 31.3.2018 AS REGARDS TS.NO.10/2015-16,PUTHIYAPAALAMIS. EXHIBIT P10 D TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL LICENSE ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF EXTENSION UPTO 31.3.2018 AS REGARDS TS .NO.12/2015-16,POTTAMMAL.

¶222

EXHIBIT P10 E TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL LICENSE ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF EXTENSION UPTO 31.3.2018 AS REGARDS TS.NO.12/2015-16,PAALAYAM.

¶223

EXHIBIT P10 F TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL LICENSE ALONG WITH ENDORSEMENT OF EXTENSION UPTO 31.3.2018 AS REGARDS TS.NO,13/2015-16 , MOONALINKAL.

¶224

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶225

EXHIBIT R4 A A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDIGN A- SAMPLE IN CR NO. 155/17

¶226

EXHIBIT R4 B A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING A- SAMPLE IN CR NO. 59/17 EXHIBIT R4 C A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING A- SAMPLE IN CR NO. 147/17

¶227

EXHIBIT R4 D A TRUE COPY OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSIS REPORT REGARDING A- SAMPLE IN CR NO. 147/17

C.v.Damodharan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.v.Damodharan 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

K.S.Abdul Sathar Vs the Managing Director, Kerala Financial Corporation Corporation

Ajmi Nazar Vs the Central Board of Secondary Education

Thayyil Puthiyapurayil Santha Vs State of Kerala

V.P.Asokan Vs Commissioner of Excise

K.Sridharan Vs Excise Commissioner

Rajan T.V. Vs State of Kerala