Appeal by the first accused in S.C No.212/2001 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Pathanamthitta. He was tried and convicted by the trial court for an offence punishable under Section 8 of the Abkari Act.
2. Prosecution allegation is that on 02-12-1997 at about 5.30 p.m., when the Excise Inspector and party of Pathanamthitta Excise Range were conducting patrol duty, they found two accused persons, who are brothers, in a rubber estate at a place in Kidangannoor Village. On seeing the Excise Officers, both of them attempted to escape. They were prevented and questioned. Appellant/first accused was found keeping possession of 3 litres of arrack in 5 litre can. He was possessing currency for Rs.355/-. Second accused was found in possession of 500 ml of arrack in a bottle and a funnel. They were arrested and sample was collected from the can. After investigation, a charge was filed before the court and the learned Additional Sessions Judge tried the first accused. As the second accused died pending the proceedings, charge against him abated. Four witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution and eight documents were marked. MO's 1 to 4 series are the material objects.
3. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor. In spite of serving notice directly on the appellant, he did not choose to appear and contest the case. I have carefully perused the records.
4. PW1 was the Excise Guard, who was present in the Excise party which detected the offence. PW2 was the Excise Inspector, Pathanamthitta, who was heading the detecting party. Ext.P1 is the seizure mahazar prepared by PW2. Testimony of PW's 1 and 2 are in complete harmony with one another. It is the definite case of these witnesses that on receipt of reliable information, the Excise party had gone to the rubber estate from where the offence was detected. According to the testimony of these witnesses, the appellant was carrying a can containing illicit liquor. He was found in possession of 3 litres of the contraband. Further, he was having the sale proceeds of liquor also. Testimony of PW's 1 and 2 derive considerable support from the recitals in Ext.P1 mahazar. After arresting the accused and completing all the formalities, PW2 registered the crime. Ext.P2 is the memo of arrest of the appellant. Ext.P6 is the property list, which was produced before the court without any delay. Ext.P5 is the remand application. Ext.P7 is the copy of requisition made to the court for sending the sample of the contraband for analysis. Ext.P8 is the chemical analysis report showing that the contraband was having presence of ethyl alcohol. The oral evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses including PW's 3 and 4 would show that the appellant committed the offence. There is no illegality or irregularity in the matter of detection and investigation. Therefore, I find that the conviction of the appellant is proper and legal.
5. The court below has awarded a reasonable sentence for the offence established against the appellant. I do not find any illegality in the matter of sentence.
In the result, the appeal is dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence of the appellant. He is entitled to get the benefit of set off under Section 428 Cr.P.C. The trial court is directed to take urgent steps to execute the sentence.
All pending interlocutory applications will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
A.HARIPRASAD, amk JUDGE.
//True copy// P.A to Judge