Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

T.M.HAMEED, S/O.MAKKAR versus THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


T.M.HAMEED, S/O.MAKKAR v. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER - WP(C) No. 14310 of 2006(C) [2007] RD-KL 902 (11 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 14310 of 2006(C)

1. T.M.HAMEED, S/O.MAKKAR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. THE ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER,
... Respondent

2. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, PAZHAYANNOOR RANGE

For Petitioner :SRI.G.HARIHARAN

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :11/01/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

W.P(C).No.14310 of 2006

Dated this the 11th day of January, 2007



JUDGMENT

Against the petitioner, a final report has been filed by the Excise Officials alleging commission of the offence punishable under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act. It is the contention of the petitioner that at any rate, the offence under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act will not lie against the petitioner and even if all the allegations are accepted, only an offence triable by the Magistrate would lie against him under Section 63 of the Kerala Abkari Act.

2. The case has now been committed to the Court of Sessions. The petitioner has now appeared before that Court. Charges have not been framed. In these circumstances, I am satisfied that it is for the petitioner to raise his contention that no charge is liable to be framed against him under Section 55(a) of the Kerala Abkari Act triable by a Court of Sessions and charge for an offence triable by a Magistrate under Section 63 of the Kerala Abkari Act alone can be framed against him. The learned Magistrate must consider this contention at the stage of Section 227/228 Cr.P.C and take appropriate decision. I am not satisfied that the proceedings against the petitioner can be quashed even accepting the submissions of the petitioner. W.P(C).No.14310 of 2006 2

3. This W.P(C) is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but with the above observations.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.