MEGH SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision is directed against an order of conviction which is not only wholly unsustainable but is also perverse. At the same time, it discloses the light-hearted and casual manner in which damage reports are made by the Forest Department and thereafter pursued in the courts of law. To top it all, the timber belonging to the Government and seized by the forest officials has mysteriously disappeared.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that PW 1 Forest Guard Maya Ram was patrolling Kawari Sihal forest alongwith PW 6 Forest Guard Surjan Singh and PW 7 Forest Guard Mohan Singh on June 24, 1982. They found one stump of 'kail' tree and one of 'Akrot' (walnut) tree indicating that the trees had been cut recently. They made enquiries which disclosed that accused Megh Singh had illicitly felled those trees. Four scants of walnut were found lying at the spot. These scants were taken into possession and given on 'spurdari' to PW 3 Shesh Ram vide spurdnama Ex. PW 1/B. Another ten scants of 'kail' were recovered and seized from the shop of the accused and given on 'spurdari' to PW 4 Rama Nand vide Ex. PW1/C. The damage report Ex. PW/A was prepared by Forest Guard Maya Ram and signed by the other two Forest Guards and PW 2 Charan Singh. After completing the formalities, a complaint was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Mandi.

(3.) ACCORDING to the very complaint filed in court and the testimony of the three Forest Guards mentioned above, they were on patrolling duty in Kawari Sihal forest on June 24, 1982 when they found two trees illicitly felled. It was thereafter that they made enquiries and came to know about the involvement of the accused. As stated above, four scants of walnut and ten scants of kail were then recovered by these Forest Guards. The date of patrolling viz June 24, 1982, finds mention in the damage report Ex.PW 1/A also. Now, if the patrolling was being done on June 24, 1982, the scants in question could not have been recovered earlier to that date. The perusal of spurdnama Ex. PW 1/8 shows that four scants of walnut recovered by these Forest Guards from the Government forest were entrusted to PW 3 Shesh Ram on 'spurdari' on June 22, 1982. This date appears in the spurdnama Ex.PW 1/B at two places. The first place is in the body of the writing and it is clear to the naked eye that the date of June 22, 1982 has been altered into June 24, 1282. He who made the above fabrication appears to have forgotten that one of the witnesses of this spurdnama had also dated his signatures and this date is completely legible as June 22, 1982. As regards the other spurdnama Ex.PW 1/C ten scants of kail were entrusted to PW 4 Rama Nand once again surprisingly enough, on June 23, 1982. It does not need a second thought to hold that the case made out in the complaint by the Forest Department cannot be but totally false and that under no stretch of imagination the case property could have been recovered on dates earlier than the day of patrolling of the forest resulting in the detection of the offence.