Back
2013 Supreme(Kar) 508
High Court of Karnataka
B.V. PINTO, J.
T.R. Shanmukha
Versus
The State of Karnataka
Criminal Appeal No. 840 of 2008
Decided On : 21-08-2013
For the Appellant:P.B. Umesh, R.B. Deshpande, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Satish R. Girji, HCGP.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for compliance with legal provisions, the sufficiency of evidence, and the need for authorization by the State Government for issuing a certificate of forest produce.
Headnote:
Karnataka Forest Act - Offence under Section 87 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 87 of Karnataka Forest Act - The court discussed the provisions of Section 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act, the requirement of a certificate of forest officer as evidence, and the need for authorization by the State Government for issuing such a certificate. The court highlighted the lack of compliance with the provisions of Section 62(c) of the Karnataka Forest Act and the absence of independent witnesses in the case. The judgment emphasized the importance of the State Government issuing a notification authorizing forest officers to certify forest produce.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were found in possession and transportation of sandalwood billets without a valid permit, leading to charges under Section 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act. The prosecution presented evidence of the seizure of sandalwood and the car, while the defense denied the allegations. The court noted the lack of compliance with legal provisions and the absence of independent witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the offence against the appellants beyond all reasonable doubt, highlighting the non-compliance with the provisions of Section 62(c) of the Karnataka Forest Act and the absence of independent witnesses. As a result, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant of the charges.
Issues: The issues revolved around the compliance with legal provisions, the sufficiency of evidence, and the lack of authorization for issuing a certificate of forest produce.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of compliance with legal provisions, the absence of independent witnesses, and the need for authorization by the State Government for issuing a certificate of forest produce.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted of the charges.
1. This appeal is filed challenging the Judgment dated 31.7.2008 passed by the Sessions Judge, I Fast Track Court, Shimoga in S.C.No.239/2006, convicting the appellants for the offence under Section 87 of Karnataka Forest Act and sentencing each of them to undergo S.I. for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/-in default of payment of fine to undergo S.I. for one year.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that on 15.6.2003 at about 10.30 p.m. the appellant along with accused No.3 with common intention were found in possession and transportation of 101 Kgs of sandal wood billets in Maruti 800 Car bearing Registration No.KL-1O-M- 9129 on Bobbi Neratur Road, without valid permit, thereby they are alleged to have committed an offence under Section 87 of Karnataka Forest Act.
3. The prosecution in order to prove the case against the accused has examined in all 3 witnesses; got marked Exs.P1 to P10 and produced MO.1-sample Sandal wood piece. The defence of the accused was one of total denial. However, by the impugned Judgment, the learned Sessions Judge was pleased to convict the appellants and sentenced them as aforesaid while acquitting accused No.3 of the charges leveled against him. The convicted accused have filed this appeal.
4. The prosecution in this case has commenced on the basis of a mahazar drawn by PW.1 on 15.6.2003 at 10.45 p.m. to 00.45 a.m. (midnight) on 16.6.2013 in which it is stated that on that day, the Range Forest Officer, Thirthahalli on credible information regarding transportation of illicit sandal wood on the Bobbi Neratur Road went on a raid along with the staff in the departmental jeep and at about 10.30 p.m. while they were so moving, he found a Maruti vehicle coming from Neratur side and when they gave a stop signal, the Car was not stopped. Thereafter, they chased the said vehicle in the jeep and about 1 km away the Maruti Van dashed against the tree and at that time all the accused came out of the Car and ran away. However, accused Nos.1 and 2 were caught hold of, but accused No.3 escaped in the darkness. Thereafter, they were brought near the vehicle and when inspected it was found that there were 50 sandal wood pieces in the said vehicle. The vehicle was a red coloured Maruti 800 Car but was having two different number plates on either side. The accused had no licence or permit to possess the sandal wood and therefore they were apprehended and mahazar as per Ex.P2 was drawn. PW.1 thereafter made entry in the Mahazar about the measurements of each piece of sandalwood and thereafter forwarded the same to the concerned authorities for taking action according to law. The case in FOC No.21/03-04 was registered and the information was sent to the Court. Thereafter investigation was commenced. Based on the information given by accused Nos.1 and 2, accused No.3 was traced and he was also apprehended. Thereafter charge sheet was filed.
5. In the court, PW.1-T.P.Shivaiah has been examined to prove the seizure of sandal wood and the Car. He has clearly stated regarding the apprehension of the accused after being chased in their departmental jeep and when the Maruti Car Collided with the standing tree by the side of the road, accused tried to escape from the scene of occurrence. He has also stated before the Court that accused Nos.1 and 2 were caught about 1 km away from the place, where the Car was abandoned and the accused was brought back to the place, where the Car was abandoned by the accused and thereafter in the presence of accused Nos.1 and 2, the car was inspected and that the said Car contained the forest produce, which was identified as sandalwood. He has stated that there were 50 pieces of sandal wood, which weighed about 101 Kgs. Accordingly, PW.1 prepared Mahazar as per Ex.P2 and got the signature of other witnesses. He has also stated that the Car was also seized at the spot. In the cross-examination, he has stated that accused was earlier involved in some other cr
