STATE OF KERALA Vs. CHOKKANATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is a material used for concealed transportation of timber or such other article in respect of which a forest offence is committed a 'tool' as understood in Section 61A of the Kerala Forest Act (for short, "the Act') liable for confiscation

(2.) A resume of facts of the case is necessary for a decision of that question. On July 10, 2003, lorry bearing Reg. No.TN 21/T-5599 carrying red sandalwood logs kept concealed among 350 cartons of biscuit was seized by the Sales Tax Inspector, Walayar. He handed over the vehicle and other materials to the Range Officer, Walayar. The Range Officer on July 13, 2003 registered O.R. No.13 of 2003 for offence under the Act and seized the vehicle, red sandalwood logs and the cartons of biscuit. Respondent who claims to have hired the vehicle for transportation of biscuits filed C.M.P. No.4727 of 2003 before the Jurisdictional Magistrate under Sec.451 of Code of Criminal Procedure for interim custody of the cartons of biscuits. Learned Magistrate allowed that application on condition of executing bond for Rs.35,000/-. The State challenged that order in this Court in Crl. M.C. No.4248 of 2003. This Court fixed the amount of bond to be executed by the respondent at Rs.75,000/-. Accordingly, the bond was executed and the cartons of biscuit were released to the respondent. Later the Range Officer on completing investigation submitted a report to the Authorised Officer for initiating proceeding for confiscation under Sec.61A of the Act. That resulted in Ext.P1, order dated January 28, 2005. The Authorised Officer confiscated the cartons of biscuit. Respondent challenged that order in C.M.A. No.80 of 2006 in the court of learned District Judge, Palakkad. Learned District Judge allowed the appeal as per Ext.P2, judgment dated January 13, 2009. Learned District Judge took the view that the expression 'tool' meant an instrument such as a hammer, screwdriver, saw, etc., which one can hold in his hand for making/ repairing things and hence the 350 cartons of biscuit cannot be termed as a 'tool' liable for confiscation under Sec.61A of the Act. The judgment of learned District Judge setting aside the order of confiscation is under challenge.

(3.) Learned Special Government Pleader for Forests contended that on the factual situation in the case learned District Judge was not correct in giving a narrow interpretation to the expression 'tool' based on the dictionary meaning of the word and that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the objective sought to be achieved by carrying the cartons of biscuit in the vehicle, i.e., concealed transportation of red sandalwood logs learned District Judge ought to have given a purposive interpretation to the expression and given the expression its popular meaning. Learned counsel for respondent contended that in view of Sec.61A of the Act the expression 'tool' cannot be given an extended meaning particularly when other materials used for transportation of timber or other forest produce are given specific mention in Sec.61A of the Act. According to the learned counsel respondent had no intention to carry timber in the lorry concealed by the cartons of biscuit.