HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR CRL.R.C.No. 867 of 2004 O R D E R: The case is being posted today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Nevertheless, there is no representation on behalf of the revision petitioner. 2. The revision petitioner is the sole accused in CC No. 229 of 2002 on the file of the Judicial First class Magistrate, Gooty. He was tried for the offence punishable U/Sec. 7-A of the A.P. Prohibition Act (for short ‘the Act’) and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default of the payment of which to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months. 3. As noted by the learned Magistrate, it is the minimum statutory sentence for the offence punishable u/Sec. 7-A of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioner preferred an appeal in Crl.A.No. 73 of 2003 before the learned V Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Anantapur. Through the impugned Judgment, the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal confirming the order of the trial court. 4. On perusal of the material placed on record, I consider that the trial court as well as the appellate court had properly assessed the evidence recorded by the prosecution. The evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 as supported by the evidence of P.W.3 coupled with the analysis report and special report, Exs.P3 and P1 respectively, clearly made out the offence punishable u/Sec. 7-A of the Act. There are no merits in the appeal. The same is liable to be dismissed. 5. In the result, the revision is dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court as confirmed by the appellate court. ______________ K.G.SHANKAR, J DT. 10-2-2011 Mjl/*