P.D. RAJAN, J.

1. Revision petitioners and 8 others were charge sheeted in C.C.838 of 1997 before Judicial First Class Magistrate, Wadakkancherry for having committed an offence punishable under Section 4 and 9(a) of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The charge against the accused is that on 30.5.1995, the Range Officer, Machad got information that the accused cut and removed 14 rosewood trees from Keerithadam estate in Asurakundu Atoor Village, Machad Range and thereby committed the offence. When he arrived at the place of occurrence, A1 to A4 were found at the place of occurrence and on the basis of information given by accused 1 to 4, the owner of the estate and others were arrayed as accused and a complaint was filed in the trial court.

2. To prove the allegation, prosecution examined PW1 to PW8 and marked Ext.P1 to P12 in evidence. The incriminating circumstances brought out in evidence were denied by the accused while questioning them. Ext.D1 and D2 were marked from the side of accused. Trial court convicted A1 to A4 and acquitted accused 5 to 12. Against that A1 to A4 preferred an appeal, which was dismissed by the appellate court. Being aggrieved by that, they preferred this revision petition.

3. Heard both sides. The main contention advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners is that Government notification in the gazette appointment of authorised officers not below the rank of rangers for the purpose of this act was not produced in the trial court. Moreover complaint was filed without obtaining previous sanction of such officer and the restriction is for the notified trees alone.

4. In reply the learned Public Prosecutor admitted that no notification has been produced in the trial court regarding appointment of authorised officers. But under Section 4 no person shall, without previous sanction in writing of the authorised officer cut, uproot or burn any species of trees.

5. According to Section 2(b), authorised officer means an officer appointed under sub-section (1) of Section 3. Authorised Officer and appellate authorities are mentioned under Section 3 of the Act. Section 3 reads as under:-

"3. Authorised officers and appellate authorities :- (1) the Government may by notification in the gazette, appoint such officers not below the rank of Ranger as they think fit to be authorised officers for the purpose of this Act, and may assign to them such local limits as the Government think fit.

(2) The Government may, by notification in the Gazette, appoint such officers as they think fit to be appellate authorities for the purposes of this Act and may assign to them such local limits as the Government think fit".

According to section 2(e) " tree means any of the following species of trees, namely-Sandalwood (Santalum album), Teak (Tectona grandis), Rosewood (Dalbergia latifolia), Irul (Xylia Xylocarpa), Thempavu (Terminalia tomantosa), Kampakam (Hopea parviflora), Chempakam (Michelia chempaca), Chadachi (Grewia tiliafolia), Chandana vempu (Cedrela toona), cheeni (Tetrameles nudiflora)". As per the Act, no person shall, without previous permission in writing by the authorised officer, cut, uproot or burn or cause to be cut, uproot or burn any tree mentioned under Section 2(e) of the Act.

6. According to Section 4 no person shall without previous permission in writing of the authorised officer cut, uproot, burn any species of tree. Section 4 reads thus:-

"Restriction regarding cutting etc, of trees - (1) No person shall, without the previous permission in writing of the authorised officer, cut, uproot or but, or cause to be cut, uprooted or burnt, any tree.

(2) The permission under sub-section (1) shall not be refused if -

(a) the tree constitutes a danger to life or property; or

(b) the tree is dead, diseased or wind fallen :

Provided that where permission to cut a tree is granted on the ground specified in clause (a) or clause (b), the authorised officer shall im