PANIGRAHI, C. J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner has been convicted under Rule 97 of the Hindol Forest Rules read with Section 26 (f) and (g), Forest Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- in default to undergo R. I. for one week. The facts proved against him in brief are that he was found in possession of 31 pieces of sal timber on 17-7-51. The forester Paramananda Das suspected that these might have been removed from the Government forest and demanded the production of permit from the accused. The accused said that he had got the timber logs from one Mr. Naylor under a permit and that the logs had borne hammer marks. No permit was produced and the prosecution evidence is that there were no hammer marks. On these facts, the petitioner, along with 4 others, was prosecuted for a forest-offence but the other persons have been acquitted by the Magistrate and the petitioner alone was found guilty of being in possession of forest produce without a permit.

( 2 ) THE trial court itself remarks "there is absolutely no evidence on record to show that the seized timber's were felled or removed from any Government Forest by any one of the accused persons. " In the absence of any evidence that the