NAYAZ AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 by the Advocate for the appellants praying to set aside the conviction and sentence dated 9-1-2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Udupi, in S.C. No. 78/06-convicting the appellants/accused for the offence punishable under Sections 86 and 87 of Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 86 of the Karnataka Forest Act and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months for the offence punishable under Section 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act. The sentence of imprisonment shall run concurrently and fine shall run consecutively. That on 6-7-2004 at about 6.30 p.m., the Range Forest Officer received a credible information that sandalwoods were stolen and were illegally transporting from Reserve Forest, Shivapura Village. The complainant is one K. Jagannath. He is the Range Forest Officer, Hebri Range. P. Sridhar, Range Forest Officer, Pedur Unit along with his officers and staff went in a Jeep bearing No. KA-20 G-13 till Shivapura. They alighted from the Jeep and they went by walk towards Shivapura Block Reserve Forest. They went inside the Forest Area Guppe Nos. 210 and 213. When they were walking, they found a person carrying a tide bag and another person carrying a plastic bag. They got suspicion and the staff encircled them. Then those two persons kept the bag on the floor and attempted to run. Accused 1 is Jayaram Shetty. The Range Forest Officer caught hold of him. The second accused attempted to escape. He fell into the bush when he tried to jump. Consequently, he sustained injuries. Staff of the squad caught hold of him. Inside the plastic bag, there were about 89 sandalwood billets weighing about 17.600 kgs. The bag which was possessed by the second accused contained saw, sickle. They have trespassed into Shivapura Reserve Forest. They have cut the sandalwood, made pieces and they were transporting the same. Therefore, it is alleged that they have committed the offence under Sections 24(c)(ii), 24(e), 24(f), 84, 86 and 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act and contravened Rules 154, 155 and 165 of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969. At the place of incident, there were about 60 kgs. of sandalwood billets and one iron pickaxe. The squad went to the spot on 13-7-2004. They have inspected the place of occurrence and done the spot mahazar. They have removed stumps.

(2.) The prosecution has examined in all three witnesses-P. Ws. 1 to 3. Exs. P. 1 to P. 14 were marked. Ex. P. 1-Mahazar, Ex. P. 1(a)-Signature of P.W. 1, Ex. P. 2-F.I.R., Ex. P. 3-Form 2, Ex. P. 3(a)-Signature of P.W. 1, Ex. P. 4-Mahazar, Ex. P. 4(a)-Signature of P.W. 1, Ex. P. 5-Seizure report, Ex. P. 6-Sketch, Ex. P. 6(a)-Signature of P.W. 1, Ex. P. 7-Arrest mahazar, Ex. P. 8-Arrest mahazar, Ex. P. 9-Out-patient slip, Ex. P. 10-Report of the Doctor, Ex. P. 11-Wound Certificate, Ex. P. 12-Confirmation letter, Ex. P. 13-lnspection report, Ex. P. 13(a)-Signature of P.W. 3, Ex. P. 14-Sanction letter and M.O. 1-Sandalwood piece, M.O. 2-Hand saw, M.O. 3-Chopper, M.O. 4-Pickaxe, M.O. 5-Plastic bag were marked. The defence has not marked any document.

(3.) P.W. 1 is the complainant. His evidence is in the same lines as that of the complaint and contents of the charge-sheet. During cross-examination, he states that in the map, length and breadth of Survey No. 232 has not been mentioned. The original map is in the office of the Conservator of Forests. There are shops and houses in the survey number mentioned in the map.