IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3829 of 2010() ------------------------------- (CRIME NO.41/2010 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) .................... PETITIONER(S): ------------------- D.SUDARSHANAN, TC 5/1777, LAILA VIHAR, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-5. BY ADV. SRI.A.AHZAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF EXCISE, EXCISE CIRCLE OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING svs THOMAS P. JOSEPH,J. ........................................... CRL.M.C.NO.3829 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 28th day of February, 2011. O R D E R Petitioner is accused in Crime No.41/2010 of Trivandrum Excise Range for the offence punishable under Rule 10 of the Kerala Spiritiuous Preparation (Control) Rule, 1969 read with Section 63 of the Abkari Act. 2. The case is that on 28.6.2010 at about 12.05 p.m petitioner was found possessing 'Sativol' without authority. According to the petitioner, by Annexures 1, 2 and 5 to 8 he is entitled to possess and sell 'Sativol'. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per the instructions given to him, liquid seized had the label “Sativol” The sample has been sent to the chemical examiner for analysis to identify what it is and the report is awaited. 3. Question whether liquid seized is 'Sativol' or not is a matter to be ascertained in chemical examination. Assuming that it is 'Sativol', question whether petitioner is authorised to possess and sell the same is a matter which has CRL.M.C.NO.3829 OF 2010 : 2 : to be come out in investigation. I have no doubt that if petitioner makes available to the investigating officer relevant records which according to him authorised him to possesses and sell 'Sativol', investigating officer will look into that also in the course of investigation before concluding whether or not petitioner had authority to possess and sell 'Sativol'. At this stage no interference is warranted. With the above observations and without prejudice to the right of petitioner to challenge the final report, if any filed before the appropriate court, this petition is closed. Sd/- THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. cl /True copy/ P.A to Judge CRL.M.C.NO.3829 OF 2010 : 3 :