2015 (3) TMI 834 - SC - Indian Laws

Offense punishable under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act - Seizure of 218 plastic cans which contained 33 litres of spirit - Interest of appellant in contraband goods - Held that - There is nothing on record to suggest that the appellant had any such interest. The Investigating Officer ought to have made an endeavour to identify those behind the purchase and transport of the contraband. He should have looked for the consignor and consignee both. That is because arrest and prosecution of the driver of the lorry in which the goods were being carried can hardly be enough to weed out illegal trade in liquor. So long as the kingpins are not identified and brought to book the purpose sought to be served by the law prescribing a deterrent punishment cannot be achieved. It is common knowledge that in matters of illegal trade whether in liquor, drugs or other contrabands, the smaller fish only gets caught while the sharks who flourish in such trade often go scot free. The arrest and prosecution of the carriers of contrabands is in that view mere lip service to the avowed purpose underlying the legislation. No reason is forthcoming in the present case why no effort was made by the Investigating Agency to expose the racketeers without whose support and involvement such a big consignment of spirit could not have been purchased nor its transportation arranged. - Penalty and sentence reduced - Decided partly in favour of appellnt.

Summary

Issues:
1. Conviction and sentence under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act
2. Appellate review of conviction and sentence
3. Quantum of sentence determination
4. Identification of key players in illegal trade

Analysis:
1. The appellant was prosecuted under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act and sentenced to seven years of imprisonment and a fine. The co-accused was acquitted. The High Court reduced the sentence to five years but increased the fine. The Supreme Court granted leave to consider the quantum of sentence.

2. Section 55(a) of the Act prescribes punishment for contravention related to intoxicating drugs. The appellant, a driver, was caught transporting a large quantity of spirit. The Court noted the absence of evidence linking the appellant to ownership or financial interest in the contraband. It emphasized the need to identify the masterminds behind such illegal activities for effective deterrence.

3. Considering the appellant's role as a mere driver and the lack of evidence implicating him beyond that, the Court reduced the sentence to three years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of one lakh rupees. Failure to pay the fine would result in an additional year of imprisonment. This modification applied to both the trial Court and the High Court's orders.

4. The judgment highlighted the importance of investigating and prosecuting not just carriers but also the orchestrators of illegal trade in contraband. It criticized the investigative agency for not delving deeper to uncover the network supporting the large-scale transportation of spirit. By reducing the appellant's sentence, the Court aimed to address the imbalance in targeting lower-level offenders while the main culprits evade justice.

This detailed analysis of the judgment outlines the legal issues, the Court's reasoning, and the ultimate decision regarding the appellant's conviction and sentence under the Kerala Abkari Act.