2022 (6) TMI 1036 - SC - Indian Laws

Manufacture of arrack - offence under Section 8(1) read with 8(2) and 55(g) of the Abkari Act - HELD THAT - Though both PW1 and PW3 have been extensively cross-examined, but nothing could be elicited out of their evidence and there are no reason to deviate from the view which has been expressed by the High Court so far as the conviction of appellant for the aforestated offences is concerned. At the same time, taking into consideration the overall aspect of the matter and the fact that 15 years have been rolled by this time from the date of incident which may due to institution lapses(the matter could have been finalized earlier) and noticing that there are no such criminal antecedents against the appellant as indicated by the respondent in para 9 of the counter affidavit and the fact that the appellant has crossed 63 years of age, consider it appropriate to modify the sentence to simple imprisonment of one year under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act and he shall also be liable to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- on both the counts, in default, he shall suffer simple imprisonment for six months. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to the correctness of judgment and order passed by the High Court of Kerala in a criminal appeal regarding conviction under the Abkari Act.

Analysis:
The appellant (A1) was convicted for offenses under Section 55(g) and 8(1) read with 8(2) of the Abkari Act. The prosecution's case involved the appellant being found manufacturing arrack in a remote area along with others. The police seized items and samples from the location, leading to the arrest and charge sheeting of the accused. The trial court convicted the appellant, sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment and fines. Other accused (A3 to A7) were acquitted. The High Court, on appeal, upheld the conviction but modified the sentence considering factors like the appellant's age and lack of criminal antecedents. The High Court reduced the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for two years and imposed fines. The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence and upheld the High Court's decision on the conviction. However, considering the time elapsed since the incident and the appellant's age, the Supreme Court further modified the sentence to simple imprisonment for one year and imposed fines.

This judgment highlights the appellate process in a criminal case involving offenses under the Abkari Act. The Supreme Court's decision focused on the evidence presented during the trial, affirming the conviction based on the lack of discrepancies in the testimonies of key witnesses (PW1 and PW3). The Court also considered mitigating factors such as the appellant's age, absence of criminal history, and the substantial time passed since the incident. These factors influenced the modification of the sentence from rigorous to simple imprisonment, emphasizing the principles of justice and proportionality in sentencing. The judgment underscores the importance of balancing punitive measures with individual circumstances to ensure fair and equitable outcomes in criminal proceedings under the Abkari Act.