IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 662 of 2010() ----------------------------------- CC.NO.8/2010 OF JFMC, SASTHAMCOTTA ......... (CRIME NO.117/2008 OF SASTHAMCOTTA EXCISE RANGE) PETITIONER(S): ACCUSED NO.2: -------------------------------------------------- GOPAKUMAR, S/O.GOPALA PILLAI, NJARAKKAL MELATHIL VEEDU, PERAYAM CHERRY, MULAVANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT (LICENSE, ALAPPATTU PHARMACEUTICALS, MULAVANA). BY ADVS. MR.PRATHEESH.P., MR.SIJU KAMALASANAN. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT & STATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, SASTHAMCOTTA EXCISE RANGE THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.662 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated 31st March 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the second accused in C.C.8/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sasthamcotta taken cognizance for the offences under Rule 17 read with Section 10 of Kerala Spirituous Preparations (Control) Rules and Section 63 of Kerala Abkari Act. Petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken as against the petitioner contending that, no offence is made out against the petitioner and in such circumstances, continuation of the proceedings is only an abuse of process of the court. 2. Prosecution case is that on Crmc 662/10 2 31/10/2008 at about 12.30 p.m first accused was found in possession of 12 bottles each having 450 ml and 11 bottles each having 200 ml Arishtam in shop building WKP.V-163, which are in excess of permissible limit and in violation of provisions of Rules 10 and 17 and they were seized and first accused was arrested. It is alleged that said bottles were manufactured by M/s.Alappat Pharmacy, Kollam and petitioner is the licensee to manufacture those articles and hence petitioner has also committed the offence. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Argument of the learned counsel is that apart from the statement of the first accused, there is absolutely no material against the petitioner to prove that he had Crmc 662/10 3 sold the bottles seized from the first accused and therefore, petitioner cannot be prosecuted. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor rightly pointed out that bottles seized from the first accused show that they were manufactured by M/s. Alappat Pharmacy, Kollam and petitioner is implicated as the licensee who is authorised to manufacture. In such circumstances, it is not in the interest of justice to quash the proceedings as sought for under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petitioner is at liberty to raise all the contentions before the learned Magistrate and seek an order of discharge under Section 239 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.