Violation Of Mandate U/S 53A & S.38 Abkari Act Gives Benefit Of Doubt To Accused: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court held that violation of mandatory provisions under Sections 53A and 38 of the Abkari Act entitles the accused to the benefit of doubt. The case concerned two individuals convicted for possession of contraband liquor under Section 8(2) of the Act. Justice Johnson John emphasized procedural lapses including failure to inform superiors and non-drawing of samples in presence of a Magistrate. The Court observed absence of proper chain of custody, lack of independent witness corroboration, and defective sealing of samples. Referring to precedents like Vijayan @ Puthoor Vijayan v. State of Kerala and Vijay Pandey v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Court reiterated that failure to prove that seized contraband was the same sent for chemical examination invalidates the prosecution’s case. The Court set aside the conviction, granting benefit of doubt to the accused and underscoring strict adherence to procedural mandates in criminal prosecutions.