STATE OF H.P. Vs. RAM SARUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE felt aggrieved by the release of the tractor of Respondent vide judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge passed in criminal appeal No. 10 -NL/10 of 1999, under Section 59 of the Indian Forest Act, in short the 'Act', filed by Respondent Ram Sarup against the confiscation of his tractor, which was allegedly found transporting 143 planks of sawn, shisham wood in the tractor trolley.

(2.) THE tractor was ordered to be confiscated without issuing notice to the owner of the tractor, by the trial Court but the learned Additional Sessions Judge in appeal relied upon the judgment of this Court in Cr. Law Reported, 1989 (2) 102: State v. Surinder Lal Sood and Ors., 1989 (2) SLC 4, held that no permit was required for transporting the wood within the same forest Division.

(3.) RAM Sarup was neither accused nor a witness of the prosecution. Admittedly, tractor in question belonged to him which was seized and later released to him on Sapurdari.