STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. MOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the appellant/State of H.P. against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Special Judge (Forest), Shimla on 23.6.1999 in corruption case No.4-S/7 of 1994. By the said order, the learned Special Judge acquitted the respondents for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 218 IPC, under Rules 11/20, 18/20 of the H.P. Forest Produce Transit (Land Routees) Rules 1978 and Section 109 read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that during the investigation of the case, FIR No.17/84, dated 28.8.1984, was registered under Sections 379, 420, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, Sections 41, 42 of India Forest Act and Section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. It came to light during investigation that permit No.233/81-82, dated 22.12.1981, was issued by DFO, Shimla, which was valid upto 30.12.1981 and it was issued for 455 number of scants of Deodar, round ballies, Kail and Rai equivalent to 27.37 cubic meters. However, it transpired that 73 number of scants of timber of different species were exported in excess through the said permit. It was also revealed during investigation of the case that while 455 scants were to be transported from Summer Hill Railway Station to outside Himachal Pradesh, 528 scants of different species were sent to different places from Summer Hill Railway Station to outside Shimla on the authority of these permits after the expiry of the export permits. It was also found that S/Shri Balak Ram, Goverdhan Singh and Kishori Lal had entered into agreement with Mohan Lal, authorized Contractor, for the sale of trees standing on their private land and after obtaining the revenue records and affidavits and agreements of these persons, they purchased the trees on different terms and conditions and they had moved application to the DFO for according permission to sell the trees and for demarcation and marking of the trees. The demarcation was ordered by the DFO and 60 trees of different species were marked in the land of these persons and felling orders were issued and Mohan Lal converted timber of 60 trees and prepared the list of converted timber and accordingly export permit was also issued.

(2.) THE matter was investigated in detail and the charge, as detailed above, was framed against both the respondents. The prosecution examined as many as 37 witnesses to substantiate their case. Statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded and they denied the allegations as against them. No defence evidence was led. After hearing the parties, the learned Special Judge acquitted both the respondents, while three of the accused persons, who were originally challaned, died before framing of the charge. I have heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the appellant/State and learned counsel for the respondents and have gone through the record of the case.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents has supported the impugned judgment for the reasons given there in supplementing it by the submission that the learned Trial Court had correctly concluded that the timber was produced before the Railway Authorities before the expiry date of the permit and as such the timber was exported before the expiry of date of the permit. The charge of criminal conspiracy was also not proved since there was not sufficient evidence on record to prove the charge and since the timber was booked within the time prescribed in the export permit and as such the guilt of the respondents was not proved according to law and the findings of the learned Trial Court cannot be said to be perverse in any manner calling for an interference by this Court. Two main questions arise in this appeal. Firstly, as to whether the timber was exported by the accused persons beyond the expiry date of the export permit i.e. beyond 30.12.1981. Secondly, as to whether 73 scants were exported in excess by the respondents.