Allowed

Raju @ Negro Raju v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jul 2019CRL.A/2819/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal, the Kerala High Court held that the conviction and sentence were unsustainable because the investigation was conducted by an Additional Sub Inspector who lacked jurisdiction under the Abkari Act. Relying on SRO 321/96 and precedent, the Court set aside the lower court's order and acquitted the appellant.

What did the court decide?

Conviction and sentence set aside; appellant acquitted; bail bond discharged.

Raju @ Negro Raju Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

CRL.A.No.2819 of 2008

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 261/2006 of ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (ADHOC)-II, KALPETTA

¶7

APPELLANT/S/ACCUSED NO.1:

¶8

RAJU

¶9

S/O DEVASSIA, GUDALLOR, TAMIL NADU

¶10

BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH

¶11

RESPONDENT/S/COMPLAINANT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA S.I OF POLICE, MEPPADI POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶13

SRI.E.C.BINEESH,PP

¶14

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

CRL.A.No.2819 of 2008

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The appellant was convicted and sentenced by the court

¶19

below under Section 8(2) and 55(g) of the Abkari Act.

¶20

The prosecution allegation is that on 06.03.2005 at

¶21

about 12.30 p.m., the appellant was found in possession of 3 litres of arrack and 75 litres of wash for the purpose of manufacturing arrack in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act.

¶22

Heard.

¶23

The learned Counsel for the appellant has argued

¶24

that since the investigation was conducted by the additional Sub Inspector of Police, Kalpetta Police Station, the appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt.

¶25

It appears that the offence was detected and the seizure was effected by PW7, who was the then Sub Inspector of Police, Meppadi Police Station. However, the investigation

¶26

¶27

CRL.A.No.2819 of 2008

¶28

was conducted by PW5, who was the additional Sub Inspector of Police, Kalpetta Police Station. As per SRO 321/96, only the officers of and above the level of Sub Inspector of Police are

¶29

the officers competent to exercise the powers under the Abkari Act. In a similar circumstances, the Court in Subramanian v. State of Kerala [2010 (2) KHC 552] held that the Assistant Excise Inspector was not a competent and authorised officer under the Abkari Act, especially under Sections 4 (d) and 70 of the Abkari Act as per SRO No. 234/1967 and hence, the seizure and arrest made by the Assistant Excise Inspector were without authorisation and jurisdiction.

¶30

In this case, the investigation was conducted by the additional Sub Inspector of Police. Since, PW5 was an additional Sub Inspector of Police, the investigation conducted by PW5 was without jurisdiction. It is also to be

¶31

¶32

CRL.A.No.2819 of 2008

¶33

noted that PW5 was the additional Sub Inspector of Police, Kalpetta Police Station, during the relevant period. On that reason also, he had no jurisdiction to investigate the crime in Meppadi Police Station. In view of the above reasons, the investigation conducted by PW5 was without jurisdiction. Therefore, the final report filed on the basis of the above said investigation cannot be sustained. Consequently, the conviction and sentence passed by the court below on the basis of the investigation conducted by PW5 cannot be sustained.

¶34

In the result, this criminal 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.

¶35

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

RK/08.07.2019

Raju @ Negro Raju v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju @ Negro Raju 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

Sushilkumar, Vs State of Kerala

Victim Vs Pappachan.C.P

Boban Joseph, Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev R, Vs State of Kerala

Sivan K. Vs State of Kerala

Reji Vs State of Kerala