KUNHAMMED Vs. FOREST RANGE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) First accused in C.C. 596/2001 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram, is the revision petitioner herein. The case was taken on file on the basis of Form-II report, filed by the Forest Range Officer, Kuttiyadi Range, against the revision petitioner and another under Section 4 read with Section 9 of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, 1986 (hereinafter called 'the Act').

(2.) The case of the prosecution in nut shell was that, 9 irul trees stood in the property in Survey No. 37/1C (New R.S. No. 424/3N) in Maruthonkara Village, having an extent of 1.65 acres owned by the revision petitioner were cut and removed with the help of 2nd accused, in violation of the Provisions of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, without sanction of the authorities and thereby they have committed the above said offence. On the basis of Form-II report, the case was taken on file as C.C. 596/2001 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Nadapuram. When the accused appeared, the particulars of offence were read over and explained to them and they pleaded not guilty. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, PWs. 1 to 4 were examined and Exts. P1 to P5 and C1 were marked on their side. After closure of the prosecution evidence, accused were questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and they denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against them in the prosecution evidence. They have further stated that, they have not committed any offence and they are innocent of the same. No defence evidence was adduced on their side. After considering the evidence on record, the trial court found the second accused not guilty for the offence alleged and he was acquitted of the charge leveled against him, but the present petitioner was found guilty under Section 4 read with Section 9 of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act and he was convicted thereunder and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo, simple imprisonment for one month. Though he filed Crl. Appeal 5/2004 before the Sessions Court, Kozhikode, which was made over to Additional Sessions Court, (Adhoc-II), Kozhikode, for disposal and the learned Additional Sessions Judge by the impugned judgment dismissed the appeal, confirming the order of conviction and sentence passed. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision has been filed.

(3.) Heard the counsel for the revision petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and Adv. Sri. Madhavankutty, Special Government Pleader for Forest cases.