BAHADUR SINGH NEGI Vs. STATE OF H.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three appeals, one by Bahadur Singh Negi, one by Balbir Singh Bastu and one by Jia Lal Bastu, are being disposed of by a common judgment, as in all of them, same judgment, i.e. judgment dated 19th April, 2002 of learned Special Judge (Forests) has been challenged. By this judgment, all the Appellants have been convicted of Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? offences, under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471 and Rule 20 of the H.P. Forest Produce Transit (Land Route) Rules, 1978, and sentenced as follows: Sr. No.OffencePunishment 1.120B IPCRigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rupee 1,000/ -, in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for three months. 2.420 IPCRigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rupee 3,000/ -, in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for six months. 3.467 IPCRigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rupee

(2.) ,000/ -, in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for four months. 4.468 IPCRigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rupee 3,000/ -, in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for six months. 5.471 IPCRigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rupee

(3.) DURING investigation of some other case, it came to light that against 2167 scants permitted to be exported, 2739 scants had been exported. Matter was investigated. 933 scants were alleged to have been exported by road from the site to Jagadhari against challans Ex. P.W. -5/A -1 to Ex. P.W. -5/A -7 and 1806 scants were alleged to have been exported by train against Railway Receipts Ex. P.W. -6/A -1 to Ex. P.W. -6/A -11. It was alleged that Railway employees, working as Station Masters and Assistant Station Masters, at Shoghi Railway Station, had connived with the present Appellants to export more timber than permitted under export permit Ex. P.W. -50/C. Therefore, those employees were also made co -accused with the present Appellants. There were some other allegations also that illicit felling of trees had taken place from Government land, but trial Court gave the finding that such allegations did not stand proved and the State has not filed any appeal challenging such finding.