The High Court of Kerala allowed the criminal appeal against conviction and sentence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. The court held that without a forwarding note, link evidence connecting the appellant to the analyzed sample was missing, leading to acquittal.
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.212 of 2007
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 276/2002 of ADDL. SESSIONS COURT (SPECIAL COURT FOR ABKARI ACT CASES), KOTTARAKKARA DATED 29-12-2006
APPELLANT/S:
RAGHAVAN
S/O KARUTHA KUNJU RAJEEV BHAVAN, MALOOR MURI, PATTAZHI VADAKKEKARA VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SMT.GEETHA P.MENON SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN SRI.R.SURAJ KUMAR
RESPONDENT/S:
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER, 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.212 of 2007
-2-
JUDGMENT
The appellant was convicted and
sentenced by the court below under Section
55(a) of the Abkari Act.
2. The prosecution allegation is
that on 10.11.1999 at about 12 Night, the
appellant was found in possession of 4
litres of arrack 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.212 of 2007
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. Therefore, 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 certificate of
CRL.A.No.212 of 2007
-4-
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,
STK
//TRUE COPY// //P.A. TO JUDGE//
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the conviction under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act can be sustained in the absence of a forwarding note for the laboratory analysis sample.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ragavan
State of Kerala
B. Sudheendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
