IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3410 of 2009 -------------------------------------- CP.28/2009 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PARAVUR .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ANEESH, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.JOY, H.NO.7/374, KATTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VARAPUZHA, N.PARUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.ALI RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AT HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3410 of 2009 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner is the accused in C.P.No.28/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, North Parur. Prosecution case is that on 8.2.2009 at about 4.30 p.m., petitioner was found transporting one bottle of 750 ml. Honey Bee Brandy and two bottles of 650 ml. each Hayward Beer and thereby committed the offence under Section 55(a) of Abkari Act. Based on Annexure-A final report, learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence under Section 55(a) of Abkari Act. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that it is only an abuse of process of the court and petitioner purchased the Indian Made Foreign Liquor for the purpose of consumption, for his relatives in connection with the house warming ceremony of his uncle and it was purchased from the Beverages Corporation and in spite of producing the bill before the police, the case has been charged. It is contended that Section 10 of Abkari Act, which deals with transportation of liquor, only CRMC 3410/09 2 prohibits transportation of liquor in excess of the quantity under the permit and Section 13 of the Act deals with possession of liquor in excess of the quantity under the permit and when the quantity of liquor seized is within the permissible limit, even if petitioner is to be tried, he will not be convicted and in such circumstances, the case is to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Annexure-A final report establishes that the quantity of liquor seized is within the permissible limit. In such circumstances, continuation of the proceedings as against the petitioner is only an abuse of process of the court and ultimately, petitioner cannot be convicted. When the quantity seized is within the permissible limit, continuation of the proceedings is not in the interest of justice. Petition is allowed. C.P.No.28/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, North Parur is quashed. 28th October, 2009 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv