The appellate court upheld the trial court's conviction and sentencing of the accused under relevant laws, affirming that minor evidentiary discrepancies do not undermine the prosecution's case.

JUDGMENT :

G.BASAVARAJA, J.

1. Criminal appeal No.6 is preferred by the appellant and against the judgment of conviction and Order on Sentence dated 21^st October 2011 passed in SC No. 119 of 2009 and 271 of 2010 by the Fast Track Court, Tiptur (for short “the trial Court”). Criminal appeal No.186 of 2012 is preferred by the State, seeking enhancement of sentence.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their status before the trial court.

3. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the Police Sub-Inspector, Huliyar Police Station, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, filed charge-sheet against accused 1 and 2 for the offence punishable under sections, 379 and 327 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 86 and 87 of Karnataka Forest Act. It is alleged by the prosecution that on the intervening night of 27/28^th November 2017 at 12:30-1245 in the midnight, accused 1 and 2 with common intention, intending to take dishonestly the sandalwood from the lands of CW1-Thyagaraju situate at Ganadalu village, Huliyar Hobli, cut and uprooted the sandalwood tree from the said lands which belong to Government and when CW1 tried to restrain the accused from removing the sandalwood piece, accused No.1 voluntarily caused hurt to CW1 with an axe attempted to store the said sandalwood in the land of CW1-Thyagaraju and thereby have committed the alleged offences.

4. After filing of charge-sheet case came to be filed in CC No.84 of 2008. Thereafter, the case was committed to court of sessions and was registered in SC No.119 of 2009 and 271 of 2010 and summons was issued. Accused appeared before the sessions court and were enlarged on bail. Upon hearing on charge, the trial court framed charges, the same was read over and explained to the accused in the language to them. Having understood the same, accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined seven witnesses as PWs1 to 7 and marked six documents as Exhibits P1 to 6 and eight material objects as MOs1 to 8. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statement of the accused under section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded. The accused have denied the incriminating circumstances appearing against them. However, have not chosen to lead any defence evidence on their behalf. Having heard the arguments on both sides, the trial court convicted the accused No.1 for the offence punishable under sections, 379 and 327 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 86 and 87 of Karnataka Forest Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under section 86 of Karnataka Forest Act. The accused was further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three years and payment of fine of Rs.5,000/- for offence punishable under section 87 of Karnataka Forest Act and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under section 379 of Indian Penal Code and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years with Rs.5,000/- for the offence punishable under section 327 of Indian Penal Code. The trial Court convicted accused No.2 for the offence punishable under section 379 of Indian Penal Code and section 86 of Karnataka Forest act and sentenced to simple imprisonment for period of 3 years with payment of fine offer Rs.5,000/- and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five months for offence punishable under Section 86 of Karnataka Forest Act and further to undergo simple imprisonment for two years with payment of fine of Rs.1,000/- for the offence punishable under section 379 of Indian Penal