LAWS(HPH)-2003-7-10

STATE OF H.P. Vs. BRIJ LAL

Decided On July 30, 2003
State Of H P And Ors Appellant
V/S
BRIJ LAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner, State of Himachal Pradesh, aggrieved by the orders of the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, dated 1st January, 2003, has filed the present petition under Sections 397, 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the legality of the orders passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, dated 1st January, 2003 in Criminal Appeal No. 11/2002.

(2.) It appears, Respondent Brij Lal was tried for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4(b), 12(a)(b) of the Himachal Pradesh Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1982 read with Section 69 of the Indian Forest Act. According to the prosecution case, accused was found in possession of 331 gunny bags of "Rakhal" (Taxus baccata) a herb also known as "Brahmi Buti" and 41 gunny bags of "Dandasa" (Walnut bark) which were stored in one of the rooms of one Shakuhtla Devi near Bhuntar. The learned trial Magistrate acquitted the accused holding that so far Dandasa (Walnut bark) was concerned, it was purchased by the accused from the Forest Department and Rakhal (Taxus baccata) a herb known as "Brahmi Buti" was not proved to have brought from the Government Forest or found in the Forest and therefore, accused-Respondent cannot be saddled with the liability. However, he directed the confiscation of Rakhal (Taxus baccata).

(3.) Dis-satisfied with the orders of the confiscation made by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Respondent carried an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge who by the impugned orders directed the release of the Rakhal (Taxus Baccata) to the accused-Respondent on the grounds that Taxus baccata was not a forest produce.