Revision petitioners challenged conviction and sentence for removing sawn teak pieces from Konni Reserve Forest. Court found no legal infirmity in concurrent conviction and held mandatory sentence was not harsh. Petition dismissed.
Criminal Revision Petition dismissed, upholding conviction and sentence.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2007 / 17TH SRAVANA 1929
Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2901 of 2007()
-----------------------------C.C. NO. 274 OF 1993 OF THE J.F.C.M.-II, PATHANAMTHITTA CRA. NO. 81 OF 2000 OF THE ADDL. DIST, AND SESSIONS JUDGE (ADHOC) COURT NO. I, PATHANATHITTA
REVN. PETITIONER: PETITIONER/APPELLANTS/ACCUSED
BY ADV. SRI.ESM.KABEER
RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT ------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S. SIVAKUMAR
THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V.RAMKUMAR, J.
Crl.R.P. No. 2901 of 2007
Dated: 7-8-2007
O R D E R
Revision petitioners who were accused Nos. 1 to 4 in C.C. 274 of 1993 on the file of the J.F.C.M.-II, Pathanamthitta for offences punishable under Sections 27(1)(g) and 2 (c0 of the Kerala Forest Act, challenge the conviction entered and the sentence passed against them concurrently by the courts below for the aforementioned offences.
On 21-11-2990 while P.Ws 1 to 4 and others who are Forest personnel attached to the Kokkathode Forest Station were on beat duty in the Naduvathu Moozhy Range in Konni Reserve Forest within the jurisdiction of the Kokkathodu forest Station they stumbled upon the revision petitioners who had trespassed into the dense forest and were engaged in removing the sawed pieces of a teak tree. On interrogation, they showed stumps of the teak trees which were felled by them and which had been converted into sawed pieces. By their action the Government has sustained a loss of Rs. 6,000/-.
Crl.R.P. 2901 of 2007 -:2:-
Ext.P1 is the contemporaneous mahazar prepared by the detecting beat party. Ext.p2 is the occurrence report and Ext.P3 is the notification showing that the area in question is a reserved forest. P.Ws 1 to 4 testified before court in accordance with the prosecution case. The learned Magistrate who had the unique advantage of seeing the witnesses and assessing their credibility had no difficulty in accepting the testimony of P.Ws 1 to 4. P.W.5 is the officer who conducted the investigation and filed the complaint before Court.
Crl.R.P. 2901 of 2007 -:3:-
cannot be said to be harsh or disproportionately excessive, particularly, when what has been imposed on them is the mandatory minimum.
This revision is accordingly dismissed.
V. Ramkumar, Judge.
ani.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the conviction and sentence under the Kerala Forest Act suffer from legal infirmity warranting criminal revisional interference.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Karunan
Bharathan
Reghu
Kunjumon
State of Kerala
V. Ramkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
