The main legal point established is the validity of the investigation and prosecution under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, and the court's reliance on the evidence presented.

( 1 ) THE petitioners herein were the accused in C. C. No. 18/1979 on the file of the Munisff and. M. F. C. , Somwarpet. They were tried by that Court for offences under Sections 86 and 87 of the karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (the Act) read with Rr. 154 and 155 of the Karnataka Forest Rules 1967 (the Rules) on the allegation that they had been found transporting in a car bearing No. MYG 1518 on 28-11-1976 at about 5 a. m. , on the public road at Seegehosur near Kakkehole bridge in Somwarpet Taluk of Kodagu District some sandalwood without a permit.

( 2 ) ON the accused claiming to be tried the learned Magistrate received the evidence for the prosecution questioned the accused, and thereafter hearing the concerned, by his judgment dated 13-6-1979, found these persons guilty and sentenced each of them to undergo R.. , for 3 months and to a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and, in default to pay the said sum, to suffer further R.. , for 3 months. The Sandalwood seized was confiscated to the Government.

( 3 ) THIS judgment was challenged by the accused before the Sessions Judge, Kodagu, Madiker. The Sessions Judge, by his judgment dated 29-6-1981 in Cr. A. No. 37 of 1979 dismissing the appeal, has confirmed the judgment of the trial Court. Challenging the concurrent findings of the courts below this revision has been preferred.

( 4 ) APART from urging that, on merits, no case at all had been made out against his clients, the learned Counsel for the petitioners also challenged the findings of the Court below on these legal grounds :

(i) that the investigation conducted, as it is, by a person not competent to investigate into the alleged offence, the same was vitiated; (ii) that the initiation of the prosecution itself is bad for the reason that the alleged investigator having filed the complaint in the form of a challan or charge-sheet maintained by the police and to use which the complainant had no authority; (iii) that the Court below could not have taken cognizance of this offence under any of the clauses of sub-sec. (1) of S. 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code); and (iv) that the proceeding in the Court below was also vitiated as the accused have been greatly prejudiced by the Court below not following the correct procedure in holding the trial.

( 5 ) THE learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, apart from denying the allegations made by the Counsel for the petitioners, supported the concurrent findings of the Courts below.

( 6 ) AMONGST others one of the objects of the Act is the preservation of the forest wealth of State, and, in particular, the very precious forest produce like the Sandalwood, Rosewooed etc. Apart from providing regulations in the matter of cutting and removal of forest produce, the State has retained its sole rights over certain categories of forest produce like the Sandalwood. Any violation of the relevant provisions of the Act and the Rules is made punishable. There are hierarchy of officials to administer this law. Chapter IX, which contains Sections 62 to 82, deals with penalties and procedure and chapter X deals with Sandalwood. Section 84 of the Act treats the sandal trees as the inclusive properties of the Government. Sub-section (1) of S. 87 prohibits possession etc. , of Sandalwood without a licence and sub-section (2) thereof provides punishment for contravening sub-section (1 ). Cutting, up-rooting, or damaging Sandalwood trees is made punishable under S. 86. Transportation of sandalwood without a licence is prohibited under Rule 154, and Rule 165 provides punishment for thus transporting. Here itself it may be noted that sub-section (2) of S. 87 has since been amended. Though at the time of this offence the punishment provided was imprisonment for two years or with fine extending up to Rs. 2,000/- or with both, since its amendment by Karnataka act No. 1/81 the maximum punishment is seven years' R.. , and with a fine which may extend up to Rs. 25,000/- and it further provides that in

Click Here to Read the rest of this document