IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 2505 of 2010()
1. MATHEW FRANCO, S/O.FRANCO, MARIYALAM
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR OF POLCIE,
For Petitioner :DR.K.P.SATHEESAN
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR
Dated :19/07/2010
O R D E R
V.RAMKUMAR, J.
---------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.2505 of 2010
----------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of July, 2010
ORDER
The petitioner who is the third accused in Crime No.120
of 1999 of Kollam East Police Station for an offence
punishable under Section 55(a) of Abkari Act for allegedly
stocking toddy mixed with Arrack in toddy shop No.16 of
Kollam Excise Range of which the petitioner is one of the joint
licensees seeks to quash Annexure-I final report and
S.C.No.442 of 2000 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kollam
on the ground that the cognizance of the offence has been
taken on the strength of a report filed by the Assistant Sub
Inspector of Police who was not an abkari officer duly
empowered to file the final report.
2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as
well as the learned public prosecutor. Even assuming that the
detection of the offence by the Assistant Sub Inspector of
Police was in his capacity as the station officer and covered by
the decision of the learned single judge (P.S.Gopinathan, J.) in
Joy Vs. State of Kerala (2010 (3) KLT Page 20), the fact
Crl.M.C.No.2505/2010
: 2 :
remains that the investigation of the case was conducted by
the A.S.I. and the final report was also filed by the A.S.I. If so,
in the light of the decision of the Division Bench report in
Subash Vs. State of Kerala (2008(2) KLT 1047) the
cognizance taken was clearly bad. The proceedings in
S.C.No.442 of 2000 on the file of the Sessions Court, Kollam
shall stand quashed.
This Criminal M.C. is allowed as above.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE
skj