STATE OF H.P. Vs. RAMESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgement of acquittal recorded by the trial Magistrate in a case under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927.

(2.) A complaint was submitted to the Judicial Magistrate by the Range Forest Officer on 25th May, 1996, containing the following allegations. On 9.3.1995, Forest Guard Mangat Ram, while patrolling Pajiara forest in Forest Range, Dalhousie, found that two Deodar trees, one of II ­A Class and another of III Class had been illicitly cut. He saw the stumps of those trees. He made inquiries and came to know that Ramesh Kumar had felled those trees and utilized the timber in the construction of his house. He went to the house of Ramesh Kumar, respondent, and noticed that timber had been used in the construction of his house. He was required to produce the papers pertaining to the timber, which he had utilized in the construction of the house. Not only that he could not produce any papers, but also confessed that he had felled two trees, stumps of which had been noticed by the forest guard in the forest. He made the confession in the presence of one Devya Parsad. Forest Guard informed the Range Officer, who demanded the compensation from the respondent for illicit felling of the trees.

(3.) LEARNED Judicial Magistrate put the substance of accusation to the respondent and on his pleading not guilty, tried him for the alleged offence. The prosecution examined Mangat Ram, Forest Guard as PW 5 and Devya Parsad, in whose presence the respondent allegedly confessed his guilt, as PW 2.