DEB RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference made by the District Magistrate of Dehra Dun.

(2.) The applicant Deb Ram was prosecuted by the Forest Department under Section 26 (1) (a) and (h), Forest Act, on the ground that he was found cultivating land situate in Majog Compartment No. 7 which, by a notification dated 9-12-1924, had been declared a Government reserved forest. The defence was that the land had been in possession of the applicant and his forefathers for a very long time and had been continuously cultivated by them and that, therefore, no offence was committed by the applicant in continuing to cultivate the land. The accused was tried summarily by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Chakrata. The learned Magistrate did not reject the defence case that the land had been for a long time under his cultivation. But it was observed that even if the accused's conteation, viz., that the land had been with his family for several decades be accepted, the rights of the tenants were extinguished by the issue of the notification aforesaid and thereafter the possession of tha accused became illegal. The applicant was, therefore, convicted under Section 26 (1) (a) and (b), Forest Act, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50 and in default of payment to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. The applicant went up in revision to the District Magistrate who made this reference, upon the ground that the provisions of Section 342, Criminal P. O. were not observed by the trial Court and further because the case was one which should more appropriately have been tried as a regular case. The learned Magistrate recommended that the order of the trial Court be set aside and the case be remanded for trial afresh.

(3.) The Magistrate examined the accused at some stage or the other. The examination is recorded in the following words : "Pleaded not guilty. Has filed written statement and would produce defence."