IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1930 CRL.A.No. 2167 of 2007() ------------------------ CRA.1326/2005 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, FAST TRACK (ADHOC)-IV, TRIVANDRUM CP.44/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-II, ATTINGAL .................... APPELLANT(S): -------------- ASOKAN, C.NO.2118, CENTRAL PRISON, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. MANOJ .R.[STATE BRIEF] RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI C.M. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K.MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- CRL.A. No.2167 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, 24th February, 2009. JUDGMENT The learned Public Prosecutor, on instructions, submitted that the appellant/accused had already undergone the sentence awarded against him and he had already been released from jail on completing the period of imprisonment. 2. The allegation against the appellant is that on 5.4.2004, the Ist accused was found in possession of one bottle of 750 ml containing coloured arrack. To substantiate the prosecution case, PWs 1 to 7 were examined and Exts.P1 to P10 were produced and marked. Material objects such as M.Os 1 to 5 were identified. PW1 was the then Excise Inspector, Excise Range Office, Kazhakkuttom, who detected the offence. PW4 was the Preventive Officer who accompanied PW1. PW5 was the Preventive Officer who arrested accused No.2 and thereafter PW6 conducted investigation. PW7 was the Thondy Clerk of the Judicial First class Magistrate's Court, Attingal. Seizure, arrest etc. are corroborated by contemporaneous document namely, Ext. P1 seizure mahazar. Ext.P2 is the arrest memo. Ext.P3 is the arrest intimation regarding arrest of the Ist accused. Ext.P4 is the list of property. Ext.P5 is the copy of CRL.A.2167/07 -:2:- forwarding note for sending sample for chemical analysis. Ext.P6 is the crime and occurrence report. Exts.P7 and P8 are the arrest memo and arrest intimation with respect to the arrest of 2nd accused. Ext.P9 is the certificate of chemical examination. Ext.P10 is the attested copy of the relevant page of the thondi register maintained in the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate II, Attingal. MO-1 is 750 ml. bottle containing arrack seized from Ist accused and MO2 to 4 are 3 bottles of 750ml each containing arrack seized from 2nd accused. MO.5 is the plastic cover in which MO2 to 4 were alleged to have been kept by accused No.2 at the time of the incident. It was on the basis of the above evidence, the trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant herein, who is the Ist accused, and also the 2nd accused. Thus, challenging the above conviction and sentence, Ist accused preferred this appeal from the jail. 3. As the appeal is preferred from the jail, Adv. Sri Manoj.R was appointed as State Brief to prosecute the appeal for and on behalf of the appellant. Thus I have heard the learned counsel appointed as State Brief and also the learned Public Prosecutor. 4. I have carefully considered the arguments advanced for and on behalf of the appellant and also considered the materials and evidence on record. CRL.A.2167/07 -:3:- 5. The prosecution has successfully established its case against the appellant through the evidence of PW1 to PW4, especially, the seizure of the contraband article and arrest of the appellant from the spot itself. Seizure was effected on the basis of Ext.P1 seizure mahazar. Arrest of the appellant is further proved through the contemporaneous documents such as Ext.P2 arrest memo and Ext.P3 arrest intimation. After the seizure and arrest of the appellant, the contraband articles and the accused were brought to the Excise Range officer, Kazhakkuttom and thereafter, the crime was registered against accused Nos.1 and 2. Without any further delay the appellant was produced before the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate II, Attingal. The evidence of PW1 corroborated by the evidence of PW4 regarding the detection and arrest of Ist accused and also the seizure of the contraband article. On the basis of the above materials, the trial court found that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing its case against the accused. On appreciating the evidence on record and other materials, I am of the view that the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case against the appellant/accused. Therefore, the conviction ordered by the trial court is confirmed. As the appellant had already undergone the imprisonment and had already been released on completing the CRL.A.2167/07 -:4:- sentence of imprisonment, no interference is called for. In the result, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is dismissed. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- CRL.A.2167/07 -:5:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. CRL.A. No.2167 OF 2007 Judgment Dated: 24.2.2009