IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2011 / 16TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16376 of 2011(V) ---------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. NAMBIKANDIYIL NANI, W/O.LATE RAJAN, MAKKOOTTATHIL HOUSE, VATAKARA TALUK, VELLIAPPALLY P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. BINDU, W/O.BABU, MAKKOOTTATHIL HOUSE, VATAKARA TALUK, VELLIAPPALLY P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SMT.C.G.PREETHA SRI.T.K.SANDEEP SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR SRI.ARUN KRISHNADHAN SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE (MULLAKKARIYIL) RESPONDENT : ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.08.2009 CRL.APPEAL NO. 389/2001 BEFORE THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, VATAKARA. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 04.06.2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 16376 of 2011 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 7th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T 1st petitioner's husband, who is the 2nd petitioner's father was convicted in an abkari offence and sentenced to simple imprisonment for 2 years and payment of fine of Rs. 1 lakh. Against the conviction and sentence, the accused filed an appeal. While that appeal was pending, he died in 2002. The appeal was finally dismissed on 19.8.2009. The respondents initiated proceedings for recovery of the fine amount by proceeding against the property of the accused, which devolved by succession on the petitioners. That is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. The petitioners' contention is that the punishment became final only on 19.8.2009, when Ext. P1 judgment was delivered confirming the conviction and sentence. Long before that, the property had devolved by succession on the petitioners. Therefore, what is now proceeded against is the property belonging to the petitioners and not of the accused, is the contention. 3. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 4. I am unable to agree with the proposition put forward by the petitioners. The accused was convicted and sentenced on 30.6.2001. He died only in 2002. Although Ext. P1 judgment confirming the conviction and sentence was passed only on 19.8.2009, that essentially relates back to the date when the accused was convicted and sentenced. The fact that W.P(C) No. 16376 of 2011 -: 2 :- subsequently the accused died and the property devolved by succession on the petitioners does not in any way prevent the respondents from proceeding against the property, which belonged to the accused at the time of sentence. Even otherwise, for realisation of amounts due from the father properties belonging to him, even if devolved by succession on the legal heirs can be proceeded against. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/