The prosecution has the burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and the accused are not required to prove their innocence.

This is an appeal against the judgment dated February 8, 1995 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Hamirpur whereby the accused/respondents (hereafter referred to as the accused) have been acquitted of the charge under Sections 41/42 of the Indian Forest Act and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, preferred by the State.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on May 15, 1992, PW-4 Jagir Chand, Sub-lnspector(Enforcement) was present at Bus Stand Hamirpur along with a few other police officials in connection with the investigation against Kishan Chand, driver of Truck No.HPK-5281 and he came to know that Truck No.HP-36/0591 had come to Hamirpur from Nadaun side. He checked the said Truck in the presence of the police officials who were members of the raiding party and PW-1 Prem Nath and PW-2 Harbhajan Singh. The Truck was being driven by accused Rashpal Singh and wooden logs were loaded in the said Truck. The Truck driver on demand produced Parcha Hamrai challan etc. which were taken in I possession vide memo. Ext. PW-2/A. The Truck was then brought to Rest House at Hamirpur. As per the challan, the Truck was to carry 120 logs of Simble whereas there was a larger quantity of the wood in the said Truck, therefore, he drew up Rooka Ext.PW-4/A and forwarded it to S.H.O. Police Station (Enforcement) Dharamshala for registration of a case under Sections 41/42 of the Indian Forest Act and Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. He took in possession 259 logs consisting of 61 logs of Simble, 7 logs of Umria, 11 logs of Bhera and 180 logs of Simble of different sizes as per the details Ext.PW-1/B vide memo. Ext.PW-1/A. He also took in possession the documents of the offending vehicle vide memo. Ext. PW-4/B. Though not clarified properly, but it has been mentioned in the charge-sheet submitted against the accused that the other two accused were co-conspirators in the illicit transportation of the timbers in the aforesaid Truck being driven by accused Rashpal Singh. A charge-sheet was accordingly submitted to the concerned Court. The accused came to be tried by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur who acquitted them by the impugned judgment, hence this appeal.

3. I have heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the State and the learned counsel for the accused and have gone through the record.

4. It may be pointed out that though there is not even an iota of evidence to prove the involvement of accused Gian Chand and Beli Ram in the commission of the offence complained against, yet in their statements under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the accused have admitted the transportation of the wood in question and have claimed that they had a permit for transportation thereof. The accused have not led any evidence to prove that they were in possession of a valid permit for transportation of the goods but to prove this defence they have relied on certain admitted facts in the evidence of the prosecution which have partly been relied upon by the learned trial Magistrate also in acquitting the accused.

5. PW-4 Jagir Chand, Sub-Inspector, the Investigating Officer in this case, in his statement has clearly and unambiguously stated that the vehicle was driven by Rashpal Singh who did not possess any export permit, however, he has further stated in his examination-in-chief itself that he took Parcha Hamrai mark-A in possession from accused Bali Ram and export permit mark-C from accused Gian Chand. It means that during the course of investigation Parcha Hamrai mark-A was taken in possession from accused Bali Ram and export permit, which though referred to as mark-C in his statement but not available on the record, was also taken in possession by him. Having taken in possession these documents, it is for the prosecution to explain as to why the transportation of the wood in question was illicit in the face of the aforesaid documents. However, neither the Parcha Hamrai nor the export permit (whi