VIJAY KUMAR SOOD Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals, filed by two sets of convicts, are being disposed of by a common judgment, because the Appellants, in both the appeals, have challenged the same judgment, i.e. judgment dated 19th March, 2002, of learned Special Judge, Kullu, whereby they have been convicted of offences, under Sections 379, 420, 468, 471, 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act, and sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment and fine.

(2.) A case was registered against the Appellants and two other persons, namely Dharam Chand (Driver) and Lal Chand (Forest Guard), on the basis of report Ex. P.W. -9/A, addressed by P.W. -9 B.P. Pathania, Range Officer, Naggar (District Kullu). In the report, it was stated that on 30th March, 1997, Block Officer, Naggar, was required to make enquiry into the timber, which was found loaded in Truck No. HIL 3112, as desired by the police, and that the Block Officer, after visit to the forest, had intimated that five trees of Kail, valued at Rs.2,13,432/ -, had been illicitly felled in N -3 and 2/27, Padhra Rias Forest and that timber in the shape of 93 scants, which was being carried in Truck No. HIL 3112, had been extracted from those trees. It was also reported that Forest Guard Jawala Dass issued damage report (Ex. P.W. -9/B), in respect of those illicitly felled trees. The aforesaid report Ex. P.W. -9/A is dated 31st March, 1997, while damage report Ex. P.W. -9/BB is dated 30th March, 1997.

(3.) DURING the investigation, it was found that Appellants Ajay Kumar Sood and Madan Lal Sood (Appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 143 of 2002) had been assigned the work of felling, converting and then transporting the trees, standing on private land in the area of Jana Forest, by the Forest Corporation of Himachal Pradesh. The trees were of Deodar, Kail and Fur species. Those trees had been duly got marked by the Forest Corporation, after getting demarcation from Revenue officials. Volume of Kail trees, which were marked, on the spot, was 55.10 cubic meters, per report Ex. P -7. The trees were supposed to yield timber around 50 per cent of the volume of the standing trees. Case of the prosecution is that Kail trees yielded 27.11 cubic meters of timber, out of which 19.979 cubic meters had been shifted to a road -side depot and there remained 7.132 cubic meters timber, consisting of 93 scants, in the forest. Procedure for shifting the timber, from the forest to the road -side depot, was that the timber, sought to be shifted, was to be jointly inspected by a Block Officer of the Forest Corporation, who, in the present case, was Appellant Nokhu Ram and by the Block Officer of Forest Department and such timber was required to be hammer marked by Forest Corporation 'sBlock Officer. Entry of such timber was also required to be made in Passing Register Ex. P -1.