In an appeal against conviction under the Abkari Act, the Court held absence of evidence proving sample drawing and tamper-proof dispatch to the laboratory broke the chain of evidence, leading to acquittal.
Conviction and sentence passed by the court below set aside. Appeal allowed.
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 01ST DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1941
CRL.A.No.284 of 2008
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN SC 438/2001 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, KOTTARAKKARA
APPELLANT/S/ACCUSED:
VISWANADHA PILLAI S/O NARAYAN PILLAI, VADAKKEKARA PUTHEN VEEDU, AYYAPPANKANDOM,, POONKULANJI, PATHIRICKALMURI,PATHANAPURAM VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL
RESPONDENT/S/COMPLAINANT/STATE:
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PP
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.A.No.284 of 2008
2
JUDGMENT
The appellant was convicted and sentenced by the
court below under Sections 55(a) and (i) of the Abkari Act.
4 litres of arrack for the purpose of sale in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act.
that since there is no evidence to prove the drawing of the sample and sending the same to the laboratory, the appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt. The learned Counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of this Court in Sasidharan v. State of Kerala [2007 (1) KLT 720] to
CRL.A.No.284 of 2008
3
buttress his argument.
PW1 would show that the contraband was seized as such and sealed at the spot. Thereafter, the contraband as such was produced before the court.
drawn the sample from the contraband, was not examined before the court to prove the drawing of the sample from the contraband and sending the same to the laboratory in a
CRL.A.No.284 of 2008
4
tamper-proof manner. This Court in Sasidharan (supra) held that without the link evidence of actual sampling by the concerned clerk of the court by drawing the sample from the can and sending the same in a sealed packet to the Chemical Examiner with a specimen seal sent separately for tamper-proof despatch, the Prosecution cannot be held to have brought home the offence against the appellant.
the drawing of the sample and sending the same to the laboratory in a tamper-proof manner, there is no link evidence connecting the appellant with the sample analysed in the laboratory. In the said circumstances, the conviction and sentence passed by the court below, relying on Ext.P7 certificate of chemical analysis, cannot be sustained.
5
CRL.A.No.284 of 2008
Consequently, I set aside the same. Since I have set aside the conviction and sentence passed by the court below on
the above said reason, I am not inclined to advert to the other grounds urged by the learned Counsel for the appellant in this judgment.
In the result, this appeal stands allowed.
Sd/-
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
JUDGE
RK//02.08.2019
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction can be sustained without evidence proving the tamper-proof drawing and sending of the sample to the laboratory.
Whether the absence of link evidence connecting the appellant to the lab sample warrants setting aside the conviction.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sasidharan v. State of KeralaReferred¶25
Sasidharan v. State of Kerala [2007 (1) KLT 720] 1
Sasidharan v. State of KeralaReferred¶35
Sasidharan (supra) 2
1 provisions across 1 enactments
VISWANADHA PILLAI
STATE OF KERALA
B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
