KABG070011842016

IN THE COURT OF THE JMFC III, BELAGAVI

AT : BELAGAVI

PRESENT : SMT. GAYATHRI. S. KATE,

B.COM., L.L.B.
JMFC III, BELAGAVI.

DATED: THIS DAY OF 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2022

C. C. No. 693/2016

COMPLAINANT: State by Excise Special Police Station,

Alani.

//Vs//

ACCUSED: 1. Parshuram Dadappa Nandevvagol,

Age: Major, Occ: Nil,
R/o: Khanagavi K. H,
Tal and Dist: Belagavi.

2. Ramanna Lagamanna Konageri,

Age: Major, Occ: Nil,
R/o: Khanagavi K. H,
Tal and Dist: Belagavi.

(By Shri. N. S. Patil, Advocate for Accused)

 2 C.C. 693/2016

JUDGMENT

The complainant/Excise Special Police Alani have filed the

chargesheet against the accused No. 1 and 2 for the offences

punishable under Sections 272 of IPC and Sections 32, 34 R/W.

Sec. 43 of Karnataka Excise Act.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are as

follows:

That on 20-04-2015 at about 16.30 hours, CW-1 has

received the credible information that few people were selling the

illicit liquor and were in possession of the same at Jungle area

between the Khanagava- Hallur village, Tal and Dist: Belagavi.

Upon receiving the said information CW-1 along with panchas

and staff went to the spot and they found accused persons were

transporting the illicit liquor and were in possession of the

same, the accused persons was knowing fully well that the said

illicit liquor is noxious drink and intoxicating substance.

Complainant police while raiding the said spot, looking to the

complainant police in uniform, immediately the accused persons

 3 C.C. 693/2016

ran away from the spot. Complainant police chased the accused

persona but did not succeed in catching the accused persons.

Later the said complainant police came back to spot and drawn

panchanama, seized rotten jaggery liquid about 2520 liters of

contained in mud pots and plastic barrels and 60 liters of illicit

liquor contained in two black colour motor tubes. Upon the

information received by the informant, complainant police came

to know that the seized illicit liquor belongs to the said accused

persons. Later complainant police came back to police station

and has reported and registered same in Crime No. 45/2015

against the accused persons, sent the samples for FSL and

received the report, completed investigation and filed chargesheet

against the accused persons for the offence punishable under

Section 272 of IPC and Sections 32, 34 R/W. 43 of Karnataka

Excise Act.

3. The accused person No. 1 and 2 got enlarged on bail.

After filing of chargesheet, cognizance was taken, case was

registered. Copy of chargesheet supplied to the accused persons

 4 C.C. 693/2016

under Section 207 Cr.P.C. As there was sufficient materials

against the accused persons was found, charge was framed

against the accused persons for the offence under Section 272

IPC and Sections 32, 34 R/W. Sec. 43 of Karnataka Excise Act

and explained to them vernacular language known to them, for

which they pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried for the alleged

offence. Hence, case came to be posted for trial.

4. The prosecution in order to prove it’s case, examined

the 04 witnesses as P.W-1 to P.W-4 and got marked 5

documents as per Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-5. After closure of the

prosecution evidence, the statement of accused persons as per

U/sec. 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. Accused persons denied the

incriminating circumstances found against them. Accused

persons is not chosen to enter into any defence evidence on their

behalf.

5. I have heard arguments of learned APP and the

learned Advocate for accused persons Perused the materials on

record.
 5 C.C. 693/2016

6. The following points arise for my consideration:

1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond

all reasonable doubt that on 20-04-2015
at 16.30 hours, at Jungle area between
the Khanagava-Hallur village, Tal and
Dist: Belagavi, in the public place. the
accused persons was found in
possession and selling the noxious illicit
liquor arrack knowing fully well, thereby
accused persons have committed an
offence punishable under Section 273
IPC?

2. Whether the prosecution further proves

beyond all reasonable doubt that on the
above said date, time and place, accused
persons was found in selling of about
2520 liters of rotten jaggery liquid
contained in mud pots and plastic barrel
and about 60 liters of illicit liquor
contained in two black colour motor tubs
for the purpose of sale, without having
valid licence or permit and thereby the
accused persons have an offence
punishable under Section 32 R/W 43 of
Karnataka Excise Act?

3. Whether the prosecution further proves

beyond all reasonable doubt that on the
above said date, time and place, accused
person was found in illegal possession of
about 2520 liters of rotten jaggery liquid
contained in mud pots and plastic barrel
about 60 liters of illicit liquor contained
in two black colour motor tubs without
 6 C.C. 693/2016

having valid licence or permit and thereby

the accused persons have committed an
offence punishable under Section 34 R/W
43 of Karnataka Excise Act?

4. What Order?

7. My answers to the above said points are as follows:

1. POINT NO. 1: IN THE NEGATIVE.

2. POINT NO. 2: IN THE NEGATIVE.
3. POINT NO. 3: IN THE NEGATIVE.
4. POINT NO. 4: AS PER THE FINAL ORDER

For the following:

REASONS

8. Points No. 1 to 3 : As these points are inter-linked

with each other and requires common discussion in order to

avoid repetition of discussion, therefore these points are

discussed together.

9. The prosecution in order to establish the offence alleged

against the accused persons must prove that on 20-04-2015 at

about 16.30 hours, at Jungle area between the Khanagava-Hallur

village, Tal and Dist: Belagavi, in the public place the accused
 7 C.C. 693/2016

persons were possession for the purpose of selling illicit liquor

of about 2520 liters of rotten jaggery liquid contained in mud

pots and plastic barrel about 60 liters of illicit liquor contained

in two black colour motor tubs. To prove the case of prosecution,

prosecution examined 04 witnesses as PW-1 to PW-4 and got

marked 5 documents as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-5.

10. Among these witnesses examined before the court

CW-1 is examined as PW-3 who is the investigating officer, CW-2

is examined as PW-1, CW-3 is examined as PW-2, who are

seizure mahazar witnesses and CW-14 is examined as PW-4 who is

the Investigating officer in this case and got marked 5 documents

as Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-5. Now this court has to scrutinize that whether

the prosecution have placed any convincing evidence to prove its

case.

11. CW-1 is examined as PW-3 who is complainant,

CW-14 who is examined as PW-4 has received the case papers

from PW-3 who are the Investigating Officers in the said case.

PW-3 who has received the information that on 20-04-2015 at

 8 C.C. 693/2016

about 16.30 hours, CW-1 has received the credible information

that few people were selling the illicit liquor and were in

possession of the same at Jungle area between the Khanagava-

Hallur village, Tal and Dist: Belagavi, in the public place. Upon

receiving the said information CW-1 along with panchas and staff

went to the spot and they found accused persons were selling the

illicit liquor and was in possession of the same, the accused

persons was knowing fully well that the said illicit liquor is

noxious drink and intoxicating substance. Complainant police

while raiding the said spot, looking to the complainant police in

uniform, immediately the accused persons ran away from the

spot. Complainant police chased the accuseds person but did

not succeed in catching the accused persons. Later the said

complainant police came back to spot and drawn panchanama,

seized rotten jaggery liquid about 2520 liters of rotten jaggery

liquid contained in mud pots and plastic barrel and seized illicit

liquor about 60 liters of illicit liquor contained in two balck

colour motor tubes. Upon the information received by the

informant, complainant police came to know that the seized illicit

 9 C.C. 693/2016

liquor belongs to the said accused persons and also collected the

samples for FSL and lodged the complainant to CW-14.

12. CW-14 who is examined as PW-4 got the complaint

from PW-3, registered the complaint in Crime No. 45/2015

submitted the FIR to the concerned court, recorded the witness

and sent the samples for FSL and received the report, completed

investigation and filed chargesheet against the accused persons

for the offence punishable under Section 272 of IPC and Sections

32, 34 R/W. 43 of Karnataka Excise Act.

13. CW-2 is examined as PW-1, CW-3 is examined as

PW-2, who are the seizure mahazar witnesses and have not

supported the case of the prosecution. Hence learned APP

requested this court to treat these witnesses as hostile witnesses

and sought permission to conduct the cross examination of said

witnesses. As per the request of learned APP PW-1 and PW-2

were cross examined by learned APP but nothing is elicited from

the mouth of the said PW-1 and PW-2. Because PW-1 and PW-2

have denied each and every suggestions put by the learned APP.
 10 C.C. 693/2016

Hence evidence of these prosecution witnesses are not helpful

to the prosecution.

14. To bring home the guilt of the accused persons

prosecution has entirely relied on the evidence of PW-3 and PW-4.

Now the question is whether the evidence of PW-3 and PW-4 are

sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused persons. It is to be

noted that PW-3 who is accompanied by PW-4 and who are also

official mahazar witnesses. Ex.P-1 raid panchanama. Therefore

except evidence of PW-3 and PW-4 there are no independent

witness or evidence of such witness to prove panchanama. On

this point I rely upon the ruling reported in “AIR 1999

SUPREME COURT 49” in the case of “Sans Pal Singh V/s. State

of Delhi”, it is held as under :

“…... – Recovery of said arms based on

evidence of police officials alone – No
public witnesses even though
available associated to witness
recovery – Conviction on basis of
 11 C.C. 693/2016

evidence of police officials – Cannot

be maintained.”
1

15. On perusal of the evidence of PW-3 and PW-4 who are

the police official and their evidences are not corroborated by the

independent mahazar witnesses. Unless there is corroborative

evidence, it is unsafe to believe the evidence of PW-3 and PW-4,

since they are the police official witnesses. Though Ex.P-4 FSL

report is proved by the prosecution with regard to sample

containing alcohol is not helpful to the prosecution case because

the prosecution has not proved that this illicit liquor has been

seized from the custody of the accused persons by leading

independent and cogent evidence.

16. On careful perusal of entire evidence, I am of the

opinion that the evidence of PW-3 and PW-4 are not sufficient to

bring home the guilt of the accused persons for the alleged

offence and also the prosecution has not placed convincing

evidence to prove the guilt of the accused persons. Hence, I come

to the conclusion that the prosecution has miserably failed to

 12 C.C. 693/2016

prove their case. Therefore, I answer points No.1 to 3 in the

Negative.

17. Point No. 4: For the aforesaid findings, I proceed to

pass the following

ORDER

Acting under Section 248(1) of

Cr.P.C. accused No. 1 and 2 are
hereby acquitted for the offences
punishable under Section 273 of
IPC and Sections 32, 34 R/W. 43
of Karnataka Excise Act.

Bail bonds of accused No. 1 and

2 and surety stands cancelled
after appeal period.

The concerned Officer is hereby

directed to dispose off the
property which is seized in this
case in accordance with law,
after appeal period is over.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by her,

corrected by me and then pronounced in the open court on
this 28-04-2022.) Digitally signed
by GAYATHRI S
GAYATHRI KATE
S KATE Date:
2022.04.28
15:32:18 +0530
(Smt. Gayathri. S. Kate)
JMFC-III Belagavi.
 13 C.C. 693/2016

ANNEXURES

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:-

PW.1: Suresh B. Gudadaigol.

PW.2: Basavanni S. Naik.

PW.3: Veeresh T. Dodamni.

PW.4: Manjunath V. Badiger.

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:

Ex.P1: Raid Panchanama.

Ex.P2: Complaint.

Ex.P3: FIR.

Ex.P4: FSL Report.

Ex.P5: Acknowledgment Dated: 19-06-2015.

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE ACCUSED:-

- Nil–

LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE ACCUSED:-

-Nil-
 14 C.C. 693/2016

MATERIAL OBJECT MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:-

-Nil-

(Smt. Gayathri. S. Kate)

JMFC-III Belagavi.