SENTHIL NATHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Criminal Revision filed against the Judgment, dated 09.12.2004, made in C.A.No.188 of 2004 on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, confirming the conviction and sentence, imposed in C.C.No.51 of 1996, dated 19.04.2004 by the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Pollachi.) This Criminal Revision is directed against the judgment dated 09.12.2004, made in C.A.No.188 of 2004, on the file of the District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, confirming the conviction and sentence imposed in C.C.No.51 of 1996, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Pollachi.

(2.) THE brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows : Based on the complaint given by P.W.1, Forest Ranger, Pollachi range, law was set in motion against the revision petitioners / A1 and A2. As per the complaint, Ex.P.1, P.W.1, after inspecting Aanaimalai sandal wood godown, on 05.12.1994 at about 10 p.m, gave his usual instructions to the forest guards / watchmen and went to his residence and that the door of the godown, where sandal woods were kept in was under lock and key. On 06.12.1994, at about 4 a.m, the forest guards / watchmen of the godown Duraiyan and Kaliyappan, P.W.2 found that the lock was broke open and thereby sandal woods were stolen, a burning 200 watts bulb was also found missing. Immediately, it was informed to the Forest Ranger, P.W.1, who came to the scene of occurrence, inspected the godown and the premises and found few human foot prints nearby the godown and some of the stored sandal wood pieces were also found dislocated and also found tyre marking of a lorry or tempo, nearby the road, and upto the end, the said human foot prints were found. Based on the complaint given by P.W.1, Ex.P.9, FIR was registered and the Investigating Officer, P.W.14 rushed to the said scene of occurrence on the said date and inspected the forest godown and prepared observation mahazar, Ex.P.10, in the presence of witnesses. Sketch, Ex.P.11 was also prepared by him.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned Government Advocate, the complaint given by P.W.1, and the evidence of P.W.6, Forest Ranger, P.W.8, Divisional Forest Officer, who seized the sandal wood from the accused and subsequent recovery of sandal wood oil and sandal wood chips from the sandal wood oil factory in Kerala, based on the confession statement given by the first petitioner herein, would clearly establish the complicity of the first revision petitioner in the alleged offence. The evidence of the Supervisor in the Elapalli Essential Oil Industries, an independent witness is also supporting the prosecution case, which is corroborated by the evidence of P.W.13, Forest Officer. Pursuant to the confession statement of the first petitioner, huge quantity of unauthorized sandal wood oil and sandal wood chips kept in the said factory were recovered.