Order The petitioner in this case has been convicted for being in possession of wash and arrack and materials to manufacture illicit arrack. There is no doubt that at the time of the search of the house only accused 3 and 4 the woman folk were present in the house. Accused 3 is the wife of the petitioner and accused 4 is the daughter-in-law. Accused 1 (the petitioner) and accused 2 were absent The petitioner is said to be the head of the family. The fact that accused 2 is married shows that he is an adult member of the family. That these articles were recovered from the house in question is established beyond doubt by the evidence of the police officer. But the question is, can it be said that the father alone was in exclusive possession of these things ? In a house kept by the father and an adult son, there is no presumption that the contraband articles found in the house should necessarily be in the possession of the father. They may as well be in the possession of the son or they may be in the possession of both. The evidence does not establish beyond doubt that the petitioner, the father, was in exclusive possession of the contraband articles. In the result the conviction and sentence are set aside and the petitioner is acquitted. V.S. ----- Petition allowed