Back
A. S. GADKARI, SHYAM C. CHANDAK
Fresenisu Kabi Oncology Ltd. Formerly Known As Dabur Pharma Ltd. , A Company Duly Registered Under The Companies Act , 1956 , Having Its Registered Office At B-310 , Som Datt Chabers-i Bhikaji Cama Place New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra Through The Public Prosecutor High Court (A. S. ) , Bombay – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Shyam C. Chandak, J. - Present Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, (Cr.PC.), seeking to quash and set aside the criminal cases mentioned in the chart hereinbelow, wherein the Petitioners have been made accused. The offences alleged against the Petitioners are same and/or similar. Only distinction is that the theft of the subject matter 'Forest Produce' has been committed at different locations of the forest/non-forest land of the Respondents. For the sake of brevity, a chart showing C.R. No.; Case No.; Accused Nos. and Sections of the Acts applied is given hereunder.
1) CWP 667/2010
J.M.F.C. Court, at Shirala. RCC No. 39/2008
Accused Nos. 108 & 109
The Wildlife Protection Act 1972: Secs. 27, 29,30,31,35,39,50,51 & 52. Indian Forest Act 1927: Secs. 26 (1) a, c, d, f, 41 and 42(e)(h) The Indian Penal Code: Secs. 107, 117 and 120-A The Bombay Forest Rules, 1942: Rules 66 & 129.
2) CWP 668/2010
J.M.F.C. Court, at Shirala. SCC No. 183/2006
Accused Nos. 42 & 43
The Wildlife Protection Act 1972: Secs. 27, 29,30,31,35,39,50,51 & 52. Indian Forest Act 1927: Secs. 26 (1) a, c, d, f, 41 and 42. The In
(1) Sandalwood oil is forest produce.(2) Generally, there is a presumption that mens rea is an essential ingredient in every offence – Yet, that presumption can be displaced either by phraseology of ....
Agarbati sticks derived from bamboo are not classified as forest produce under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, as they undergo significant processing leading to a commercially distinct product.
Transit of forest-produce beyond pass validity constitutes forest-offence mandating confiscation of produce/vehicle; strict compliance essential as deterrent to deforestation, liberally construed for....
The possession of Yarsa Gambu (Cordyceps Sinensis) by the applicant was found to be illegal under the Indian Forest Act, 1927, despite the applicant's claim as a member of Scheduled Tribe.
The conviction under the Indian Forest Act cannot stand without proving the area as a reserved forest and the petitioners' actual involvement in the offence.
Point of Law : There is a presumption that forest area belongs to the Government until the contrary is proved.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for complaints under the Forest Conservation Rules to be lodged by authorized personnel, and the limitation of vicarious liability ....
The legal requirement of the place being a reserved forest for the application of Section 26(e) and (f) of the Forest Act was emphasized, and the court highlighted the need for proof of such designat....
The court emphasized the importance of following judicial precedents concerning the interpretation of offenses under the Kerala Forest Act as they apply to agricultural practices.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
