SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Hrishikesh Roy, S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. Alak - Appellant Versus The State Of Kerala - Respondent Criminal Appeal No. 1198 OF 2013 With Criminal Appeal No. 1201 of 2013 Decided On : 09-01-2025 Advocate Appeared : For the Appellant : Mr. Roy Abraham, Adv., Ms. Reena Roy, Adv., Mr. Adithya Koshy Roy, Adv., Mr. Yaduinder Lal, Adv., Ms. Rajni Ohri Lal, Adv., Mr. Mehull Jain, Adv., Mr. Himinder Lal, AOR For the Respondent : Mr. Nishe Rajen Shonker, AOR, Mrs. Anu K Joy, Adv., Mr. Alim Anvar, Adv., Mr. Santhosh K, Adv., Mr. C. K. Sasi, AOR, Ms. Meena K Poulose, Adv. ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. Roy Abraham, learned counsel for the appellants. The State of Kerala is represented by Mr. Alim Anvar, learned counsel (in Criminal Appeal No. 1198 of 2013) and by Mr. C.K. Sasi, learned counsel (in Criminal Appeal No. 1201 of 2013). 2. The appellants were charged and tried for offences punishable under Section 55 (a)(i)(g) and (h) of the Abkari Act and were convicted. They were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 year. The case of the prosecution was that on 06.08.1999 at about 10:10 p.m., accused Nos. 1 to 8 were found to be in possession of a barrel containing 60 litres of arrack, empty bottles, sealing machines, alcoholo-meters, labels, etc. which were kept by them in a building bearing Door No. IV/355 in the Pallivasal Gram Panchayat. The offence was detected by the Sub- Inspector of Police, Vellathooval Police Station. 3. The conviction of the accused by the learned Sessions Judge on 04.05.2005 was based on material exhibits and also on the evidence of PW-1 and PW-6. 4. Upon challenge by the accused, the High Court under the impugned judgment (dated 20.06.2012) upheld the conviction. The Court also relied on the evidence appreciated by the trial court and observed that the police had no reason to cook up a false case against the accused persons. 5. The Tehsildar, Devikulam as the PW-1 deposed that the concerned house was searched in his presence by PW-6 and the Contraband in question was seized. The PW-2 was the owner of the house and he said that the same was let out to one of the accused. 6. Mr. 5. The Tehsildar, Devikulam as the PW-1 deposed that the concerned house was searched in his presence by PW-6 and the Contraband in question was seized. The PW-2 was the owner of the house and he said that the same was let out to one of the accused. 6. Mr. Roy Abraham, learned counsel would point out certain discrepancies in the testimony of the witnesses but when we scrutinised the evidence of PW-1 and PW-6, we see no reason to disturb the conviction of the appellants on the so-called discrepancies pointed out by the counsel for the appellants. The evidence of the key witnesses with the report of the chemical examiner clearly proves the guilt of the appellants and we see no reason to upset their conviction under the Abkari Act. 7. On the sentence, it is seen that the incident in question had occurred more than 25 years ago in August, 1999. The records indicate that the appellant Alak (accused No. 4) was arrested on 02.08.2012 and granted bail on 10.10.2012. Accordingly, bearing in mind all the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to modify his sentence to the period undergone. Thus, the sentence for the appellant Alak is reduced to around 87 days (period undergone) but he must remit the enhanced fine amount of Rs.1,25,000/-(instead of Rs.1,00,000/-) within 8 weeks before the trial court. In default, he is to suffer incarceration for 2 months. 8. So far as the four appellants – Ramaswamy, Madaswamy, Krishnankutty and Varghese @ George in the Criminal Appeal No. 1201 of 2013 are concerned, they were arrested on 06.08.1999 and were granted bail on 23.08.1999. As such, they have been in custody for about 17 days. 9. As the conviction is under Section 55 (i) of the Abkari Act which does not provide for any minimum sentence, for these four appellants, while upholding their conviction, we deem it appropriate to modify the sentence to the period undergone by them. However, the fine for these four is increased from the ordered Rs.1 lakh to Rs.2 lakh each. The fine amount must be deposited by each of the four appellants -Ramaswamy, Madaswamy, Krishnankutty and Varghese @ George within eight weeks from today before the learned trial court. In the event of default in deposit of fine amount, the appellants will undergo incarceration for two more months. 10. With the above order, the matters stand disposed of.