JIGGA Vs. STATE BY R.F.O.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant (hereinafter referred to as accused No. 3) in S.C. No. 16/2006 was tried along with accused Nos. 1 and 2 for offences punishable under Sections 86 and 87 of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act') read with Section 34 of IPC. Accused Nos. 1 to 3 are convicted for offence punishable under Section 86 of the Act read with Section 34 of IPC and are acquitted of offence punishable under Section 87 of the Act. Therefore, accused No. 3 is before this Court. I have heard learned counsel for accused No. 3 and the learned SPP for State.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosecution that on 5.4.2005 at about 6.40 a.m. near Talavane School at Adigebylu village, accused 1 to 3 found felling sandalwood tree and they were in illegal possession of 35 Kgs. of sandalwood billets and committed offences punishable under Sections 86 and 87 of the Act. In view of conviction of accused for an offence punishable under Section 86 of the Act, the following points would arise for determination:

(3.) THE learned counsel for accused No. 3 referring to Section 62 -C of the Act and also by relying on the judgments of this Court, reported in : ILR 2010 KAR 3382 (in the case of Raghavendrachari vs. State of Karnataka; an unreported judgment of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 994/2007 (in the case of Saleem vs. The State of Karnataka) dated 7.11.2012 and an unreported judgment of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 840/2008 (in the case of T.R. Shanmukha vs. The State of Karnataka) dated 21.8.2013, would submit that P.W. - 1 - S.M. Shivarathreshwaraswamy, the then Forester of Koppa Range, Koppa, had not been notified as officer competent to examine forest procedure and give a report.