( 1 ) IT is said in our jurisprudence an appeal is to be provided It does not lie in the nature of things. If an appeal is provided it has also to specify the authority which will hear the appeal. The latter part of the statement is the subject in the above case.

( 2 ) THE issue arises under Section 44 (2-E) of the A. P. Forest Act, 1 of 1967 ( the Act ). In that it is specified the district Court will bear appeals against orders under sub-sections (2-A) and (2-B) of Section 44. The specification was considered by this Court in Crl. M. P. No. 2688 of 1984 on november 16, 1984. A single judge of this court held the appeal be heard by the District Judge. The same question was considered in V. P. Nagi Reddy vs. State of A. P. #1 and it was held the appeal against orders in sub-clauses (2a) and (2-B) is to be heard by Sessions Judge in the Districts. The decision in earlier ease was not cited in the latter case. The instant case is placed before a divisional bench to revolve the conflict in the two cases.

( 3 ) WE may start the discussion and for the background the Amendment Act 17 of 1976 to the Act may be seen. In that authorised Officer in the forest department was empowered to deal with forest offences. The Authorised officer was empowered to confiscate the forest produce, the vehicle, tools, ropes, chains, boats and cattle used in committing the forest offence. The forest produce and tools if produced before a Magistrate such a Magistrate can convict the offenders, pass a sentence and confiscate the forest produce, vehicles, etc. Against the orders of the Magistrate, an appeal is provided under Section 49. The appeal in Sec. 49 is to be heard under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In such a case it is needless to state the Magistrate s order is appealable to the Sessions Judge.

( 4 ) THERE is the conflict as to the appellate authority under Section 44. The doubt or conflict arose when orders of confiscation are passed by the authorised Officer of the Forest Department. The statute prescribed appeal is to be heard by a District Court under Section 44 (2-E ). The words district court are not defined in the Act. To the same authority i. e. District Court appeal is provided against orders under Section 10 where the subject of the appeal is rights of way; rights in water courses, rights of pasture and rights in forest produce. In such a case appeal is to be heard bv the District Court under Section 13 of the Act. The Appellate authority in such a case is not the Sessions Judge is not in dispute.

( 5 ) THUS appeal under Section 49 is to be heard by the Sessions Judge. Section 13 states appeal is to be heard by the District Judge. The conflict arose in the case of appeal under Section 44 where like in Section 13 the words used are district Court . The appellate authority thus is specified, yet it was in the reported cases held the appeal is to be heard by Sessions judge. In the unreported decision it was held a criminal revision was not maintainable against the decision of appellate authority. It was added appeals in Section 44 (2-E) are not regulated by the Code of Criminal procedure. Sub-secticn (16-A) of Section 3 of the General Clauses Act and sub-section (4) of Section 2 of Code of Civil Procedure were referred. It was concluded the words district Court indicated the appeal was not to be heard by a criminal Court. In that perspective criminal revision was held not maintainable. Inferentially the decision was appeal in Section 44 is to be heard by the District Judge. That is how it was concluded in the unreported decision on November 16, 1984.

( 6 ) IN Nagireddy s case it was held words district Court were not defined, therefore, to ascertain the meaning Section 3 of the Evidence Act was referred. In that Act court was defined to include judges, Magistrates and all those who were authorised to record evidence. The General Clauses act of 1897 was referred to held district Judgemeans the Judge of th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document