State of Kerala Police vs Biju Kurian — 101403/2024
Case under Abkari Act Section 55(a),55(I),13. Disposed: Contested--AQUITTED on 23rd April 2026.
SC - SESSIONS CASE
CNR: KLAL010050062024
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
104287/2024
Filing Date
19-11-2024
Registration No
101403/2024
Registration Date
19-11-2024
Court
District and Sessions Court Alappuzha/ Rent Control Appellate Authority
Judge
3-Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge-II Alappuzha/Rent Control Appellate Authority
Decision Date
23rd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--AQUITTED
FIR Details
FIR Number
462
Police Station
Kainady Police Station
Year
2024
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
State of Kerala Police
Adv. Asst.Public Prosecutor Alappuzha
Respondent(s)
Biju Kurian
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Addl. Dist. and Sessions Judge-II Alappuzha/Rent Control Appellate Authority
Disposed
Order/ Judgement
FOR HEARING
Defence Evidence
Examination of the Accused U/S 351 BNSS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Disposed | |
| 17-04-2026 | Order/ Judgement | |
| 06-04-2026 | FOR HEARING | |
| 27-03-2026 | Defence Evidence | |
| 11-03-2026 | Examination of the Accused U/S 351 BNSS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted Biju Kurian of charges under the Kerala Abkari Act for allegedly possessing 6 liters of Indian-made foreign liquor for sale. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to critical evidentiary gaps: no direct evidence of sale or intent to sell, doubts about the accused's identification, absence of spot arrest, missing procedural compliance (no inventory certificate under Section 53A), and the independent witness turning hostile. The accused was acquitted and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted Biju Kurian of charges under the Kerala Abkari Act for allegedly possessing 6 liters of Indian-made foreign liquor for sale. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt due to critical evidentiary gaps: no direct evidence of sale or intent to sell, doubts about the accused's identification, absence of spot arrest, missing procedural compliance (no inventory certificate under Section 53A), and the independent witness turning hostile. The accused was acquitted and released. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
More from this court
District and Sessions Court Alappuzha/ Rent Control Appellate Authority All courts →Explore other courts