IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 3803 of 2010(A)
1. GEORGE JOSEPH,AGED 47 YEARS,S/O.JOSEPH,
... Petitioner
2. JOMON,S/O.JOHNY,ARIMALIYIL HOUSE,
Vs
1. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
3. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR,EXCISE RANGE OFFICE
For Petitioner :SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :16/02/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.3803 OF 2010 (A)
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of February, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioners are two of the accused in C.R.No.67/2007, in
respect of which CC.No.88/2009, is now pending before the Judicial
First Class Court, Kattappana. Petitioners submitted Exts.P2 and P3
applications to the first respondent requesting for compounding of
the offence against them under Section 67(1) of the Abkari Act.
Request was considered and rejected by Ext.P5.
2. Two reasons are stated in Ext.P5. One is that all accused
have not applied for compounding and the other is that case is
already charge sheeted and therefore only with the leave of the
court compounding can be considered.
3. In so far as the first objection raised is concerned, counsel
for the petitioners submit that all accused are willing to make
application for compounding and therefore the request need be
considered only if the first respondent receives applications from
the remaining accused also.
WPC.No. 3803/2010
:2 :
4. In so far as the 2nd objection raised that since the case has
been charge sheeted compounding is possible only with the
permission of the court, counsel for the petitioner invites my
attention to Ext.P6 judgment rendered by this court in
OP.No.7316/1998 in identical circumstances. In this judgment it
was clarified that it will be open to the Excise Commissioner to
compound the offence and further directed the Criminal Court to
keep the proceedings in abeyance for the report of the
Commissioner.
5. Having regard to the directions issued in Ext.P6 judgment
and as the facts of the case are similar in all respects, I see no
reason why a different stand should be adopted in this case.
Having regard to the above, I dispose of this writ petition with the
following directions.
First respondent shall consider Exts.P2 and P3 provided the
other accused in CR.No.67/2007 also make their request for
compounding the offence against them, in CR.No.67/2007. It is
directed that the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattapana
before which CC.No.88/2009 is pending will defer further
WPC.No. 3803/2010
:3 :
proceedings in the case by 3 months awaiting decision of the first
respondent on the compounding application which are directed to
be considered as above. It is directed that once orders are passed
on the compounding application, a report shall be made to the
Criminal Court, which shall act upon the report and pass
appropriate orders in the matter.
vi (ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE