A criminal appeal against conviction under the Abkari Act for possession of arrack. The High Court set aside the conviction and sentenced the appellant to be acquitted due to lack of a forwarding note, preventing tamper-proof dispatch of the sample to the laboratory.
Conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted; bail bond discharged.
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.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 27TH ASHADHA, 1941
CRL.A.No.164 of 2007
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 167/2002 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (SPECIAL COURT FOR ABKARI ACT CASES), KOTTARAKKARA DATED 08-01-2007
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CP 19/2001 of JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I,KOTTARAKKARA
APPELLANT/S:
LEKSHMANAN @ THAMPI
S/O.NEELAKANDAN, THAMPI SADANAM, ELIYODU MURI, EZHUKON VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.D.JAYACHANDRAN
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, ERNAKULAM.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.A.No.164 of 2007
JUDGMENT
The appellant was convicted and
sentenced by the court below under Sections 55(a) and (i) of the Abkari Act.
2. The prosecution allegation is
that on 7.7.1999 at about 8.40 p.m., the
appellant was found in possession of 3 litres of arrack for the purpose of sale in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act.
3. Heard.
4. The learned counsel for the
appellant has argued that since no forwarding note was produced and marked
before the court, the appellant is entitled
to benefit of doubt.
CRL.A.No.164 of 2007
-3-
5. It appears that no forwarding note
was produced and marked before the Court in this case. Therefore, it has to be held that the prosecution could not establish the tamper-proof dispatch of the sample to the laboratory. Consequently, there cannot be
any guarantee that the sample produced before the court and analysed in the laboratory was the sample drawn from the contraband seized from the appellant. Since no forwarding note was produced and marked before the court, there is no link evidence connecting the appellant with the sample analyzed in the laboratory. In the said circumstances, the conviction and sentence passed by the court below, relying on Ext.P5
CRL.A.No.164 of 2007
-4-
certificate of chemical analysis cannot be sustained.
In the result, this appeal stands allowed, setting aside the conviction and sentence passed by the court below and the appellant stands acquitted. The bail bond
of the appellant stands discharged.
Sd/-
B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, JUDGE
STK
//TRUE COPY//
//P.A. TO JUDGE//
1 issue framed by the court
Whether conviction can be sustained when no forwarding note for sample dispatch was produced?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
LEKSHMANAN @ THAMPI
STATE OF KERALA
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
