IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2009 / 2ND ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17455 of 2009(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SHYJIN M., SHINE NIVAS, EZHUKONE KOTTARAKARA , KOLLAM DISTRICT, (LICENSEE OF TODDY SHOP NO.16, KUNDARA SHOLP) 9CRIME NO.63/07 OF KOLLAM EXCISE RANGE) BY ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN MR.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR MR.M.R.JAYAPRASAD MR.P.MOHANDAS MR.MATHEW SUNNY RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY, TAXES(A) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE COMMISSIONERATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER KOLLAM. 4. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KOLLAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2009 ,ALONG WITH WPC. NO.17456 & 17457 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).Nos.17455, 17456 & 17457 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT These writ petitions are filed on grounds referable to clause (3) of the abkari policy 2009-2010 of the State of Kerala. That clause provides that preference will be given to those persons who are running different toddy shops during the preceding three years. Persons who were exonerated from abkari cases are also eligible to such preference. Persons charged with abkari offences, other than under Section 56B of the Abkari Act, will not be granted licence. The provision that the persons charged with abkari offences other than under Section 56 of the Abkari Act will not be granted licence fell for consideration of this Court in Vijayan v. Excise Commissioner {2002(3) KLT 646}, interpreting the words “charged with” in the Rules as they existed in 2002. This Court, referring to Section 211 of Cr.P.C., laid down that Wpc 17455/09 & conn. 2 “a person can be said to be “charged with” an offence when, on the basis of a final report and the relevant details collected during investigation and after perusing the final report filed by the investigating officer before the court, the court proceeds to frame and charge. It was held that only then, a person could be said to be “charged with” an offence.” Applying that judgment, W.P(C).8756/09 and connected matters were decided holding that unless charge has been framed by the Court for abkari offences against a person in terms of Section 211 of Cr.P.C., he cannot be excluded from being granted license on a ground referable to any allegation against him as to the commission of any offence punishable under the abkari law. In view of the declaration of law contained in that judgment, in all these writ petitions where there are no charges framed by the court against the petitioners, they are entitled to the benefit of clause (3) of the policy document, if they are otherwise entitled to that priority. It is so declared. Following the above declaration, the abkari officers will ensure that the declarations made herein is applied on a case to Wpc 17455/09 & conn. 3 case basis in relation to each of the petitioners in these writ petitions and they will be permitted to participate in the sale for the year 2009-2010. These writ petitions are ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. lgk.22/6.