Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Madan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, Judge
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 12.10.2011, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction dated 26.5.2009 and order of sentence dated 3.6.2009, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,Theog, District Shimla, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision are that the police presented a challan against the accused before learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act (in short ‘the Forest Act’). It was asserted that HC Subhash Kumar (PW11), Constable Sunil Kumar (PW6) and Constable Sunil Kumar (PW10) were present near Harog on 11.11.2016 at about 12.30 AM. They signalled a Tempo Trax, bearing registration No. HP-09A-1175 to stop. The driver identified himself as Madan Singh (the accused). The police found logs of deodar loaded
The prosecution must produce primary evidence to sustain a conviction; non-production of seized timber undermines the case.
Section 62(C) of Karnataka Forest Act reads as certificate of Forest Officer to be an evidence.
Presumption under Forest Act Section 69 cannot convict under IPC Section 379 without proving theft from government forest. Substance identity requires expert proof with botanical name, not mere local....
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....
It is the duty of the prosecution and especially of I.O. of the case to satisfy the conscience of the Court by negating the chances of suspicion arising in the facts of case.
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....
Transporting timber without a valid permit violates the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act and Timber Transit Rules.
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
