AGRAWAL SUNILKUMAR BABULAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 24-6-2005 passed in Criminal Appeal No.49 of 2003 by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.1, Mehsana, confirming the judgment and order dated 17-11-2003 delivered by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Visnagar in Criminal Case No.1622 of 1987 whereby the applicants-original accused Nos.1 and 2 were convicted and sentenced to undergo SI for three months with a fine of Rs.1,000/- and Rs.500/- respectively, in default, to undergo further SI for 15 days and 10 days respectively for the offence punishable under Sec.3(1) and 3(2)(d) of Gujarat Minor Forest Produce Trade Nationalisation Act, 1979.

(2.) FACTS as appearing in this revision is that a complaint was filed by the respondent No.2 complainant against the applicants on 3-12-1987 alleging that the applicant No.1 unauthorisedly collected gum from the forest and stored at an unauthorised place of applicant No.1. The applicant No.1 paid fine amount of Rs.2,000/- on 2-6-1987. However, gums weighing 202.11 quintal were seized by the respondent No.2 under Sec.14(3) of the Act and complaint was filed in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Visnagar, under Sec.17 of the Act, Secs.206 and 201 of IPC and Secs.3(1) and 3(2)(d) of the Act. Upon issuance of summons, the accused remained present before the Court and their statements were recorded. They also placed on record their reply denying the prosecution case. Upon affording opportunity of hearing to the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Visnagar, delivered the impugned judgment convicting and sentencing the applicants as aforesaid in the earlier part of this judgment giving rise to prefer the present revision.

(3.) THIS Court is also in complete agreement with the reasons adopted and the conclusions arrived at by the learned trial court in the impugned judgment so far as the conviction of the present applicant is concerned. However, in view of the provisions of Sec.15, the question to be considered is as to whether the applicant in the given facts and circumstances of the case entitled to reduction of sentence which has been awarded by the trial court or not.