STATE OF H.P. Vs. SURINDER LAL SOOD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE has preferred the present appeal against the judgment, dated 12th October, 2001, of learned Special Judge (F), Shimla, whereby respondent Gurcharan Singh, who alongwith respondent Surinder Lal Sood, was tried for offences, punishable under Sections 120 -B, 379, 420 of Indian Penal Code, Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, has been acquitted, and respondent Surinder Lal Sood has also been acquitted of all the offences, except under Rule 20 of the Himachal Pradesh Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules, 1978.

(2.) FACTS , which led to the charging and trial of the respondents, may be noticed. In the year 1982, 28 Deodar trees, 37 Kail trees and 3 Rai trees, standing on Khasra No. 56/14, belonging to one Mania and one Murtu, had been purchased by a forest lessee, named Gian Singh. He felled those trees and extracted timber therefrom. He was issued Export Permit No. 42/82 -83, dated 6th May, 1982, for the export of the timber so extracted. Permit was valid upto 22nd May, 1982. Validity period was extended twice; initially upto 11th June, 1982 and then upto 31st July, 1982. Against the aforesaid Permit, respondent Surinder Lal Sood allegedly exported timber and transported the same by train. He booked the timber for transportation by train at Railway Station, Shoghi, where respondent Gurcharan Singh was employed as Station Master those days. While investigating case FIR No. 19 of 1984, dated 29th February, 1984, it came to light that respondent Surinder Lal Sood had not only used the Permit issued in favour of M/s Gian Singh Private Contractor, but had also exported more timber than permitted to be exported and also beyond the validity period of Export Permit.

(3.) TRIAL Court, on the conclusion of the proceedings, held respondent Surinder Lal Sood guilty of exporting timber, against a permit issued in favour of another person, namely Gian Singh, and convicted him of offence, under Rule 20 of the Himachal Pradesh Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules, 1978. It, however, rejected the prosecution story that there was any conspiracy between respondent Surinder Lal Sood and respondent Gurcharan Singh and in furtherance of that conspiracy, timber in excess of the quantity authorized by Export Permit had been exported.