SHAKEEL AKHTAR KHAN Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal writ petition has been filed against the order dated 18.10.2006 passed by the C.J.M., Farrukhabad in Crl. Case No. 55/76 of 2006, State of U.P. v. Shakeel under Section 4/10 U.P. Protection of Trees Act, 1976 as well as the order dated 20.1.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in Crl. Revision No. 268 of 2006, Shakeel v. State of U.P. For the purpose of disposal of this writ petition, the relevant and essential facts are as such that the petitioner on 7.6.2006 had cut down the trees of Shisham standing in his field without permission of the Forest Authority and he was ready to carry the said timbers of Shisham in the trolley. The S.H.O. of P.S. Rajepur, district Farrukhabad on a tip off of some informer reached the spot and seized four logs of the said Shisham tree and had brought the said trolley alongwith the said timber to the police station and thereafter lodged the first information report against the petitioner. On the basis of that FIR, a case crime No. 311 of 2006, under Section 4/10 U.P. Protection of Trees Act, 1976 was registered at the police station Rajepur, district Farrukhabad and after investigation in the said case, charge-sheet was also filed against the petitioner under Section 4/10 U.P. Protection of Tree Act, 1976. The petitioner moved the application for taking the said timber in his custody but the application of the petitioner was rejected by the C.J.M. concerned vide his order dated 18.10.2006. Thereafter he filed a criminal revision against that order in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad but the revision was also dismissed. Aggrieved by these two orders, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the prayer that the aforesaid orders dated 18.10.2006 and 20.1.2007 be quashed and the S.H.O. of P.S. Rajepur, district Farrukhabad be directed to release the said timber in his favour otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss.

(2.) On the other hand, the State counsel supported the impugned orders and submitted that the Shisham tree was cut down by the petitioner without seeking permission from the Competent Authority and the same is liable to be forfeited to the Government if the petitioner is convicted in the case in question.

(3.) Admittedly, the timbers of Shisham in question were taken into custody by the police from the possession of the petitioner and the same is lying in the open sky in the field of the police station concerned and there is strong likelihood of its becoming decayed due to rain and other natural climates. If the same is wasted, no useful purpose of either party would be served. So, in these circumstances, I think it just and proper to release the said timbers in favour of the petitioner during the pendency of the case in question. The petition is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned orders dated 18.10.2006 and 20.1.2007 are, hereby, quashed. The Magistrate concerned is, hereby, directed to release the said timbers in question in favour of the petitioner on his executing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned with the condition that the petitioner will not change the nature of the said timbers and will produce these timbers before the Court concerned or any other authority as and when he is directed to produce the same.