IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 4276 of 2005()
1. DHEERAJ, AGED 20,
... Petitioner
2. SUNIL RAJ @ NELSON, AGED 22,
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.D.ASOKAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN
Dated :22/05/2008
O R D E R
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No. 4276 of 2005
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of May, 2008
O R D E R
The petitioners who are the accused in Crime
No.241 of 2005 of Kovalam Police Station approached this
Court with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. registered against
them since according to them, no offence under Section 55
(a) of the Abkari Act is disclosed.
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that on
26.9.2005 at 7 p.m., the petitioners were transporting 13
numbers of bottles, each having capacity of 650 ml. (total
quantity comes to 8.45 litres) of beer with brand name “King
Fisher” in a scooter bearing registration No. KL-
01/F/4591. According to the police, the first petitioner
was riding the scooter where the second petitioner was
the pillion rider. Thus, according to the Police, the
petitioners have committed the offence punishable under
Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. When the above Crl.M.C.
came up for admission on 16.12.2005, this Court stayed all
further proceedings in Crime No.241 of 2005 of Kovalam
Crl.M.C. NO. 4276 of 2005
:-2-:
Police Station on the file of the J.F.C.M.Court-III,
Neyyattinkara by order dated 16.12.2005. Counsel for
the petitioners submits that no offence is disclosed
against the petitioners, since, even if the total quantity
is taken, the same may become only within the
permissible quantity which the petitioners can possess.
In support of the above submission, he placed reliance
on the decision of this Court reported in Prasanth v.
State of Kerala (2002(1) KLT 628).
3. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that in
the light of the above decision relied on by the
petitioners, there is no meaning in directing the
petitioners to face the trial as there is no possibility for
an effective prosecution and conviction.
4. As per the F.I.R. and Annexures A and B
documents, the alleged occurrence had taken place on
26.9.2005 on which date as per rules and on the
strength of S.R.O.No.127 of 1999 which was in force,
one person can possess 7.8 litres of beer. Therefore, the
total quantity of beer both the accused could possess
Crl.M.C. NO. 4276 of 2005
:-3-:
under the Act comes up to 15.6 litres. Now, as per the
allegation, the total quantity alleged to have possessed
by the petitioners is only 8.450 litres and if it is divided
into two, the quantity possessed by one accused will
come to only 4.225 litres. If that be so, no offence under
Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act is disclosed and there is
no meaning in directing the petitioner to face the trial.
In the result, the F.I.R. in Crime No.241 of
2005 of Kovalam Police Station and all proceedings
thereon are quashed. Crl.M.C. is allowed.
V.K.Mohanan,
Judge
MBS/
Crl.M.C. NO. 4276 of 2005
:-4-:
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
——————————————–
Crl.R.P.NO. OF 200
——————————————–
J U D G M E N T
Crl.M.C. NO. 4276 of 2005
:-5-:
DATED: -2-2008