IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 8096 of 2009(F)
1. T.R.RAJAN, S/O.RANGANATHAN
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA
... Respondent
2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE
3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE
For Petitioner :SRI.B.GOPAKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :17/06/2009
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No.8096 OF 2009
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of June, 2009
JUDGMENT
The issue raised by the petitioner is that no charge having
been framed against him by the court in terms of Section 211 of
Cr.P.C., he cannot be denied the benefit of the priority contained
in clause (3) of the abkari policy of the State for the year 2009-
2010 in relation to toddy shops. That principle is well covered in
his favour. But the learned Government Pleader submits, on
instructions, that on 30.6.2008, charge has been laid before
court (J.F.M.C., Iringalakkuda). Framing a charge by the court
in terms of Section 211 of Cr.P.C. has been well explained by the
judgment of this Court in Vijayan v. Excise Commissioner
{2002(3) KLT 646}. It wouldn’t be safe now to conclude
whether there is a charge framed in terms of Section 211 of
Cr.P.C. Therefore, this writ petition is ordered directing that
unless the respondents are satisfied, on the basis of cogent
materials, that charge has been framed against the petitioner in
terms of Section 211 of Cr.P.C., as stated in Vijayan’s case, he
WPC.8096/09
Page numbers
shall be permitted to enjoy the priority in terms of clause (3), if
he is otherwise entitled to such priority. The writ petition is
ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
Judge.
kkb.17/6.