STATE OF H.P. Vs. HIRU RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE has instituted this appeal against the judgment dated 25.5.2011 rendered by the Special Judge (forests), Shimla in Corruption Case No. 7 -S/7 of 2007.

(2.) CASE of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that during the investigation of FIR No. 19/84, Inspector Sunder Lal while checking records of Railway Station, Shoghi noticed that M/s. Hiru Ram, Private Sale Contractor, Kotkhai misused export permit No. 138/81 -82 dated 4.7.1981 and transported 1277 scants against permitted 633 scants. FIR bearing No. 11/85 was registered in Police Station Enforcement South Zone, Shimla. Various documents, including an application for felling from Khasra Nos. 341, 348 and 343 were taken into consideration. Demarcation was conducted and trees were marked for felling and the Divisional Forest Officer granted permit No. 138/81 -82 dated 4.7.1981 for transportation of 633 scants. This permission was granted upto 3.10.1981. 597 scants were transported through Forest Check Post, Dhalli. However, through RR Nos. 821577, 821578, 821580, 821586, 821601, 821602, 821771, 821773, 821779, 821781 and 821783, 1277 scants were transported to various firms at Jagadhari. RR Nos. 821577, 821578, 821580, 821586, 821601 and 821602 were issued by deceased accused Hari Krishan, Station Master, Shoghi and the forwarding notes were filled up by Hiru Ram himself. Forwarding notes accompanying RR Nos. 821601 and 821602 were signed by Shiv Dutt. Deceased Milkhi Ram had signed in his capacity as A.S.M., RR Nos. 821771, 821773, 821669 and 821781 and Hiru Ram had signed forwarding notes accompanying RR Nos. 821577, 821578, 821580 and 821781. Subhash Chand was the Assistant Station Master, Shoghi. He issued RR No. 821783 and forwarding note was signed by Hiru Ram. Hiru Ram received payment of Rs. 72,000/ - from M/s. Saverwal Brothers, Yamuna Nagar. He received Rs. 18,983.92 from M/s. Ghanshyam Dass Vijay Kumar. The specimen signatures and handwritings were obtained and sent to Government Examiner, Questioned Documents for examination with the disputed handwritings. The Challan was put up in the court under sections 379, 420, 467, 468 and 120 -B of the Indian Penal Code, under sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act read with sections 5(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(3.) MR . P.M. Negi, learned Deputy Advocate General has vehemently argued that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused.