STATE OF H.P. Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition can be disposed of on two very short and simple grounds.

(2.) IN this petition, to be treated as one having been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India in view of the order passed by their Lordships 12th of the Supreme Court on February, 2004 in Criminal Appeal No.217 of 2004, the order passed on 16th October, 1995 by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, Kullu and Lauhal Spiti Districts at Mandi in Criminal Appeal No.19 of 1995 is under challenge. By this impugned judgment, while setting aside the order passed on 31st July, 1995 by the Authorised Officer under Section 52-A of the Forest Act (Himachal Pradesh Amendment), the learned Sessions Judge has directed the release of the truck in favour of the respondent. The order passed by the Authorised Officer under Section 52-A (supra) has been set aside by the learned Sessions Judge mainly on one ground.

(3.) IT may also be noted here that in this case there were serious doubts about the recovery of timber from the vehicle in question because apparently by invoking Section 27 of the Evidence Act, the timber was recovered from a nearby place. That, however, is not the ground upon which I should even take note of in this petition because that ground was not even taken into consideration while rendering the decision by the learned Sessions Judge.