High Court Of Himachal Pradesh
D.P.SOOD
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH - Appellant
Versus
AMI CHAND - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 303 of 1988
Decided On : 12/27/1991
INDIAN FOREST ACT - PROTECTED FOREST - SECTION 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 78 - EVIDENCE ACT - SECTION 78 - NATURAL JUSTICE - PUBLICITY OF LAW - SUMMARY
Fact of the Case:
The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against the acquittal of the respondent for encroaching upon four Bighas of land forming part of Bhadral' demarcated protected forest. The trial court acquitted the respondent for want of proof of notification.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the Bhadral forest was a demarcated protected forest by cogent and convincing evidence. The court also held that the notification declaring the forest as protected was not proved in accordance with law and that the mandatory provisions of section 31 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, which requires the translation and affixation of the notification in the local vernacular in the neighbouring villages, were not followed.
Issues: 1. Whether the Bhadral forest was a demarcated protected forest? 2. Whether the notification declaring the forest as protected was proved in accordance with law? 3. Whether the mandatory provisions of section 31 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, were followed?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the Bhadral forest was a demarcated protected forest by cogent and convincing evidence. 2. The court held that the notification declaring the forest as protected was not proved in accordance with law as it was not produced in accordance with section 78 of the Evidence Act, 1872, which requires the production of the records of the department or a duly certified copy of the notification by the Head of the Department. 3. The court held that the mandatory provisions of section 31 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, which requires the translation and affixation of the notification in the local vernacular in the neighbouring villages, were not followed.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of the respondent.
D. P. Sood, J.—The State of Himachal Pradesh through the instant appeal has assailed the impugned judgment dated December 30. 1987, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rampur Bushar, District Shimla, whereby the respondent was acquitted of the offence under section 33 of the Indian Forest Act.
2. The complaint was filed against the respondent for the commission of the aforesaid offence alleging illicit encroachment upon four Bighas of land forming part of Bhadral’ demarcated protected forest. The trial Court by the aforesaid impugned judgment acquitted the respondent for want of proof of notification. The State of Himachal Pradesh has come up in this appeal against the impugned judgment recording order of acquittal.
3. The allegation against the respondent from the complaint appears to be that Bhadral forest was a demarcated protected forest and the respondent had encroached therein and broken up the land as was found on April 23, 1985. The damage report (Ex. PW-l/A) was prepared besides lqbalnama (Ex. PW-l/B), which was got signed from the accused. Later he was prosecuted.
4. Substance of accusations was put to the respondent-accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. According to him he was in possession of the alleged encroached land since the time of his forefathers,
5. On appraisal of the evidence, the learned trial Court acquitted the respondent on the ground that the aforesaid forest was not proved to be demarcated protected forest by any cogent and convincing evidence by the prosecution.
6. Shri C. L. Sharma, Advocate appearing as Special Public Prosecutor for and on behalf of the appellant, vehemently attempted to persuade this Court by submitting that judicial notice of the official Gazette can be taken by this Court to hold that the aforesaid Bhadral forest was demarcated protected forest. According to him the learned Court below has erred in having brushed aside the copy of the notification (Mark X) in respect thereof and thus recording order of acquittal in favour of the respondent/ accused.
7. Sections 29 to 39 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (shortly hereinafter referred to as the Act’) are material. The procedure of declaring protected forest is laid down in section 29 of the Act, which provides that the State Government may by notification in the official Gazette declare the provisions of Chapter IV of the Act applicable to any forest land or wasteland which is not included in a reserved forest, but which is the property of Government, or over which the Government has proprietary rights, or to the whole or any part of the forest produce of which the Government Is entitled. The forest land comprised in such notification is referred to in the Act as protected forest. Sub-section (3) of section 29 of the Act provides for certain inquiries to be made before declaring a forest as the protected forest’. Under section 30, the State Government is authorised inter-alia to declare any trees or class of trees in protected forest to be reserved from the date to be fixed by notification or to prohibit from a date fixed for the removal of any forest produce and the breaking up or clearing for cultivation of any land in a protected forest for such terms, not exceeding thirty years as the State Government thinks fit. Resultantly, the rights of private persons, if any, over such portion shall stand suspended during such term provided that the remainder of such forest be sufficient and in a locality reasonably convenient, for the due exercise of the rights suspended in the portion so closed. The Collector then is required under section 31 to cause translation into the local vernacular of every such notification issued under section 30 to be affixed in a conspicuous place in every town and village in the neighbourhood of the forest comprised in the notification. Section 32 entitles the State Government to make rules to regulate the forest matters set out in the said section including "clearin
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.