SHYAM SUNDER ROUT Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner having been convicted under Rule21 of the Orissa Timber and other Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1980 (for short, 'the Transit Rules') and sentenced to undergo SI for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to undergo further SI for two months and such conviction and sentence having been confirmed in appeal, has preferred this revision.

(2.) The petitioner was tried for the offence that on 10-12-1980 his saw mill running in the name of Satyanarayana Saw Mill was raided at about 2.45 p.m. The raid party found some logs inside the mill premises without any hammer mark and the petitioner was also not able to produce any licence or permit for keeping the logs. The logs were seized and the matter was investigated into after completion of which the prosecution report was submitted. The petitioner having denied the offence, the trial ensued. The case of the prosecution was established through seven witnesses all of whom stated regarding the fact of raid and seizure, excepting P.W. 6 who though was a witness to seizure yet did not support the prosecution case.

(3.) Mr. Misra, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has assailed the conviction firstly on the submission that the cognizance of the offence having been taken under Sections 27 and 37 of the Orissa Forest Act, a conviction under Rule 21 of the Transit Rules could not have been made and that secondly the seizure of the logs could not be said to have been from the possession of the petitioner since it was the evidence of the seizure witnesses that the mill had no fence and that the seizure was not evidenced by independent witnesses.