LexSASIKUMAR & ANR. versus STATE OF KERALA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 9 S.C.R. 1061 SASIKUMAR & ANR. v. STATE OF KERALA (Criminal Appeal No. 1987 of 2012) DECEMBER 4, 2012 [AFTAB ALAM AND RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, JJ.] (Kera/a) Abkari Act - s. 8(1) rlw s. 8(2) - Illicit trade in arrack A B - Three accused -Seizure of two cans containing 40 litres of arrack from their possession - Trial court convicted all the C accused and sentenced them to RI for 3 years and a fine of Rs.1,00,0001- with default sentence of one year RI - High Court, though maintaining the conviction, reduced the sentence to RI for 18 months and the default sentence for . failure to pay the fine, to RI for six months - On appeal before D Supreme Court by two accused i.e. the two appellants - Held: The conviction of the appellants was justified - However, from the quantity seized and the manner in which it was being carried, it is evident that the accused were only small time operators in the illicit trade of arrack - In the circumstances, E sentence reduced to one year RI and sentence in default of payment of fine reduced to 15 days in the case of the appellants - Relief granted to appellants extended to the non- appea/ing accused as well, since no distinction between him and the case of the appellants. F (Kera/a) Abkari Act - s.8(1) rlw 8(2) - Illicit trade in arrack - Minimum fine prescribed at Rs.1,00,0001- in terms of s.8(2) - Default sentence/imprisonment for failure to pay the fine - Effect of - Observation made by Supreme Court that in a way, fixing the minimum fine at such a high amount (i.e. G Rs.1,00,0001-), leads to a) discrimination in favour of convicts who have sufficient means to pay the fine and, thus, avoid any default imprisonment and b) additional sentence of imprisonment for poor convicts as they are hardly in a position 1061 H 1062 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 9 S.C.R. A to pay such high amount of fine - It is desirable to leave the Court free in exercise of judicial discretion in the matter of imposition of fine. According to the prosecution, the three accused 8 were coming in an auto-rickshaw when they saw a police party whereupon all of them ran away leaving the auto- rickshaw at the spot. On inspection, the police found two cans containing 40 litres of arrack lying inside the auto- rickshaw. C The trial court convicted the three accused under Section 8(1) read with 8(2) of the (Kerala) Abkari Act and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- with default sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment. In appeal, the High Court, D though maintaining the conviction, reduced the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for 18 months and the default sentence for failure to pay the fine, to rigorous imprisonment for six months. E The accused No.1 apparently accepted the judgment of the High Court and did not prefer any SLP. The other two accused, i.e., the appellants, however, came up before this Court in the present appeal challenging their conviction as also the sentence awarded to them. F Partly allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. Both the trial court and the High Court have meticulously considered the evidences led by the prosecution and have rightly arrived at the conclusion in G regard to the appellants' guilt. Insofar as the conviction of the appellants under Section 8(1) of the Abkari Act is concerned, there is no scope for any interference and the conviction of the appellants as recorded by the trial court and affirmed by the High Court is upheld. [Para 7] (1065- H H; 1066-A] SAS I KUMAR & ANR. v. STATE OF KERALA 1063 2. From the facts of the case it is evident that the A appellants (accused nos.2 and 3) as well as accused no.1 are not the real men behind the nefarious trade of illicit intoxicants in the State. From the quantity seized from the possession of the accused and the manner in which it was being carried, it is evident that the three accused B were only small time operators in the illicit trade of arrack and though visible, they constitute the weakest link in the chain of illicit trade in arrack. In those circumstances, a further reduction of the sentence would be quite in order. Accordingly, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced c from 18 months, as awarded by the High Court, to one year and further the sentence in default of payment of fine is reduced from six months to fifteen days. (Para 11) (1066-H; 1067-A-C] 3. Accused No.1 is not before thi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.