Back
MITALI THAKURIA
Lipamungo Odyuo – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam, Represented By Special PP Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Mitali Thakuria, J.)
Heard Mr. S. K. Srivastava, learned counsel assisted by Mr. N. Z. Lotha, learned counsel for the appellants for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Special Public Prosecutor, Wildlife for the State respondent.
2. This is an appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the impugned judgment and order dated 07.07.2023, passed by the learned Special Judge, Wildlife, Karbi Anglong in Special Wildlife (Protection) Case No. 01/2023, arising out of C.R. Case No. 934/2017, whereby the appellants were held guilty for the offence under Section 29 of the Wildlife Act, 1972 punishable under Section 51(1) of the said Act, and the appellants were sentenced to a simple imprisonment of 1 (one) year and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only each and in default simple imprisonment for another 1 (one) month with the benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27.05.2017, at about 6.30 a.m., a secret information was received by one Shri Sundorsing Teron, Forest Beat Officer, Lahorijan Beat Karbi Anglong (West) Division regarding illegal entry of some persons into Doldoli Reserve
The prosecution must prove unauthorized entry and destruction of wildlife habitat beyond reasonable doubt for conviction under the Wildlife (Protection) Act.
Point of law: Re-appreciation of evidence - Revisional jurisdiction of High Court - In any case it is well settled that the scope of revisional jurisdiction of High Court does not extend to re-apprec....
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.
The court upheld the conviction under the Indian Forest Act while highlighting the need for strict enforcement of forest protection laws, but reduced the sentence to account for the appellants' perso....
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for strict interpretation of criminal statutes and the need to suppress mischief and advance the legislative object. The judgment a....
The prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in their acquittal.
Section 62(C) of Karnataka Forest Act reads as certificate of Forest Officer to be an evidence.
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
