High Court Kerala High Court

K.Nagaraja vs State Of Kerala on 29 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.Nagaraja vs State Of Kerala on 29 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 2850 of 2010()


1. K.NAGARAJA, AGED 34,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. NARESH, AGED 25, S/O.ANAND,

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :29/07/2010

 O R D E R
                        V.RAMKUMAR, J.
                   ---------------------------------
                   Crl.M.C.No.2850 of 2010
                   ----------------------------------
            Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010

                               ORDER

The petitioners who are accused Nos.1 and 2 in

S.C.No.580 of 2007 on the file of the Additional Sessions

Court (Ad hoc-III), Kasaragod in a prosecution of the offence

punishable under Section 8(2) of the Abkari Act for allegedly

found in possession of 900 sachets of arrack (the sale of which

is restricted in the State of Karnataka) and which were kept in

two white plastic sacks in the autorikshaw and registered by

the Manjeswar Police as Crime No.170 of 2006, seek to quash

Annexure-A2 proceedings of the Additional Sessions Court as

per which the case which was posted for judgment was

re-opened.

2. This Court called for a report from the Additional

Sessions Court. He has sent his report to the effect that when

the above case stood posted for judgment, on perusal of the

entire records it was brought to his notice that the inventory

as well as the photographs prepared by the Assistant Excise

Crl.M.C.No.2850/2010
: 2 :

Commissioner under Section 53A of the Abkari Act were not

marked in the case and then it was to enable the prosecution

to mark the same after examination of the Assistant Excise

Commissioner that the case was re-opened and it stands

posted to 11/8/2010.

3. The inventory relating to the residue of the samples

and the photographs were prepared by the Assistant Excise

Commissioner under Section 53A of the Abkari Act. Hence,

there was nothing wrong in the learned Additional Sessions

Court re-opening the case for the purpose of marking the

above documents by examining the Assistant Excise

Commissioner. The petitioner will have an opportunity to

cross-examine the witness as and when he is examined. The

proceedings of the court below are not liable to be quashed

for the reasons stated in the petition.

This Criminal M.C. is accordingly dismissed.

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

skj