transported to Hirapur godown on 21.1.2009 and 25.1.2009 as per the passes at Exhibit C. It is argued that, such gum could not have remained moist for 3-4 months when gum was seized vide panchanama dated 6.4.2009. Learned A.P.P. submits that, the forest officials rightly claimed that, the gum found in the Yawal Forest Division from the house of petitioner was not the same and that it had been illegally collected from Yawal Division where there are ample Salai and Kad trees. It has been submitted that, Yawal Forest Division has many Salai, Dhawada, Khair, Kad trees, from which gum is extracted. According to respondents, there was illegal extraction in the area by making notches and removing of barks whereby the trees were being damaged and so, forest cases were required to be filed as because of such activities the trees die after some days. Respondents claim that, as per Section 78 of the Bombay Forest Rules, 1942, if a forest produce is transported, it is necessary that the pass is examined and the articles are stored in depots for the purpose. The learned A.P.P. has submitted that, the impugned order has been passed after considering all relevant factors and the petition deserves to be rejected. Reliance has been placed on Section 69 to claim that, whenever question arises whether forest
