LexK.R. SURAJ ETC. ETC. versus THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, PARAPPANANQADI AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
\ \ \ K.R. SURAJ ETC. ETC. A v. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, PARAPPANANQADI AND ANR. DECEMBER 4, 2000 [SYED SHAH MOHAMMED QUADRI AND S.N. PHUKAN, JJ.] B Kera/a Abkari Act, 1077-Sections 30, 31, 50A, 56(b), 57A-Search and collection of samples of liquor from premises by Excise Inspectors in 1993 under Section 31-Samples of liquor revealed adulteration-Offence under Section 57A-Amendment of Section 31 to prosecute for offence under C Section 57A, made only in 1997-Validity of prosecution for offence committed in 199 3-Held, search and collection of samples by Inspectors made on belief of commission of any offence under the Act-Establishment of offence after examining evidence-Prosecution under Section 57 A rightly initiated- Criminal Procedure Code-Section 482. In 1993, respondent-Excise inspectors collected samples from licensed liquor shops of appellants under Section 31 of the Kerala Abkari Act, 1077 D to detect any adulteration. The respondents lodged complaints against the appellants under various provisions, including Section 57 A of the Act, alleging, inter alia, that the samples showed adulteration of liquor or E intoxicating drugs with noxious substance. The Magistrates took cognizance of the offences' The appellants filed petitions before High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceedings initiated by the respondents. The High Court dismissed the petitions. Hence this appeal. The appellants contended that the respondents had no authority under F unamended Section 31 of the Act to take action for offences committed under Section 57 A of the Act by collecting samples; that Section 31 of the Act .does not specify offences committed under Section 57 A of the Act; that Section 31 contains offences which are triable by a Magistrate whereas the offence under Section 57 A is triable by a Court of Sessions for which there is no G machinery till 1997, when Section 31 was amended; that Section 50A was inserted to the Act in 1997 to provide for trial of offence committed under Section 57A; that the proceedings before 1997 under Section 31 is illegal, which is liable to be quashed; and that the prosecution for offence under Section 57A committed in 1993 under Section 50A of the Act would result 333 H 334 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. A in giving retrospective effect to Section 50A which, in the absence of any specific provision in the Act, is impermissible. One of the appellants contended that the charges against the appellant under Sections 57 A and 56(b) of the Act are not specified in Section 31 of the Act for prosecution. The respondents contended that Section 31 of the Act gives power to B initiate prosecution for offences committed under Section 57 A by collection of samples; and that Section 57 A was inserted in the Act in 1984 while the offence was committed in 1993. c D Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD : I. I. In the absence of a search warrant issued under Section 30 of the Kerala Abkari Act, for entering any place, there must b! existence of any reason for the specified officers to believe that the offences mentioned in Section 31 has been committed. Once an officer gains entry in any place, he can exercise the powers authorised in Section 31 which are not confined to offences specified in the Section. It is too banal a contention to merit acceptance that having seized an article liable to confiscation under the Act or having detained and searched a person found in such place who is believed to be guilty of an offence under the Act, no person can be prosecuted in respect thereof for an offence unde.r the Act except for the offences mentioned E in the Section. [340-8, Cl 1.2. The entry and search of any place per se would be illegal if the prosecution fails to establish the facts for commission of offence under the Act. The collection of samples and consequent prosecution of the alleged offender will equally be illegal. But under the amended Section 31 of the Act, F such a power extends to every case where the Excise Inspector has reason to believe that an offence under the Act has been committed. On a valid entry and search of any place in exercise of power under unamended Section 31 of the Act, if an Excise Inspector finds material suggestive of commission of an offence under the Act in addition to or instead of the specified offences, G he can, on the basis of such material file a complaint/report regardin
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.