SHARAFUDHEEN K P Vs. FOREST RANGE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners herein are the four accused in C.C.No. 460 of 1996 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thamarassery. They faced prosecution before the court below under Section 27(1)(d) of the Kerala Forest Act, and Rule 3(iii) of the Kerala Forest Produce Transit Rules on the allegation that on 23.09.1993, they were found unauthorisedly transporting some quantity of sandalwood oil in two cars. One of the cars was driven by the first accused with the second accused as passenger, and the other car was driven by the third accused with the 4 th accused as passenger therein. The offence was detected by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnamangalam, on the basis of secret reliable information. When the Sub Inspector intercepted the vehicles on public road, the two drivers made an attempt to escape, but the police party obstructed the vehicles, and on examination, sandalwood oil contained in four barrels was found being transported in one of the cars. The sandalwood oil was seized as per a mahazar by the Sub Inspector along with the vehicles, and the four accused were arrested on the spot. A crime was also registered by the Sub Inspector on the basis of the arrest and seizure. Subsequently, the crime was transferred to the Forest Department for necessary investigation. Accordingly, an Occurrence Report was registered at the Forest Station, and investigation proceeded. After investigation, the Forest Range Officer of the Thamarassery Forest Range submitted final report in court against the four accused.

(2.) All the four accused appeared before the learned Magistrate, and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them. The prosecution examined nine witnesses, and proved Exts.P1 to P7 documents in the trial court. The MO1 to MO10 properties were also identified during trial.

(3.) When examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused denied the incriminating circumstances, and projected a defence that nothing was seized from their possession. They examined a witness in defence as DW1.