STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. BALBIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge herein in this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr. P.C') is against the judgment dated 27.11.2003, of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kinnaur, at Reckong Peo, whereby the Respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused'), was acquitted of the offence under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act, 1872 (in short 'the Act').

(2.) IN brief, the case of the prosecution is that in the month of March 1997, the accused had cut and removed two deodar trees from Government Forest without valid permit/permission. It was noticed only on 27.3.1997, when Shri Ramesh Chand, Block Officer (PW -1) and Shri Daulat Ram, Forest Guard (PW -4), were on routine checking in the jungle. On enquiry, it was revealed that the trees have been felled by the accused, who had carried away the timber to his house. Accordingly, both the aforesaid Forest Officials went to the house of the accused, who confessed his guilt in the presence of Member, Gram Panchayat. 26 scants of deodar were recovered from the possession of the accused and were handed over to Shri Sadar Vir (PW -2), Member, Gram Panchayat, vide sapurdari memo Ex.PW2/A. Damage report was prepared against the accused by the Forest Guard in the presence of Shri Sadar Vir (PW -2) and Shri Bhag Sain (not examined). Ikbalnama (confessional statement) of the accused was also recorded. The value of the trees was assessed at Rs. 78,416/ -. The accused had agreed to pay compensation equivalent to the value of the trees towards which he deposited a sum of Rs. 10,000/ -. However, he did not pay the remaining amount of compensation. Accordingly, the case was filed against him in the Court.

(3.) ON close of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined by the learned trial Court under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein his defence was that of total denial, innocence and false implication. In defence, he examined one witness, namely, DW -1 Shri Bhag Nar.