Karnataka High Court
Rama S/O. Appi Siddi vs State Of Karnataka, on 4 June, 2012
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
Uk) U)
-
q??z U)
2
1
U)
crUU)fl acr a U) H U)
U) U)
r ! $ U)
(U
a cc U)X U)
a --
a r a ao H!
j aU) Cl)
z_t fr
0
°
1
t$
C,,(DZPZ a U
U) U) U) U) 0
H
[ a H
, U)
aa cC. a
I
) U)0
U)
as U) CD ZO
>U)U)UC. Oct
CA) A) CE)
pU). U) HO
ccc
&o
LcLa 0
U) U)>
CU
:iaiU
U) -U)
U)>
a Z U)
oZ
U U) _U) U)
a U) U) cc U)
U CD a
a C' Cl) U)
c U) U)
U)
UC'i U
a
A) A)) Ct
U U
't
Kannada, Kanar in Session C'asc 'ia. 88/2010 be set
aside and this accused ma' be acquitted (tom the
hirpes fr med
This aimu:i1 .ppea1 cs,mltit on f.,i adniissien. this
N. 4tind. .T drlnvred tht following:
.
JUDGMENT
Thc matter s listed for ddnnss o 1 rs. The m r (Ct tndc are teethed matter is taken for final disposal.
'the 2ppellants (lit remafter cit ned t as a e iscd Nos ancL) ere tn d and to uteted for offences punn3ahk 'tridi r set nuns 44 rid So of flr ha;nataka Fuiest A. "t' ('or l er ti 1 k' ' id 'VIII %n t<,r 37C) t IPC J..aC It i.nt it, ..pp_aU ,nr_ .g.s' S vi' n%:..k. I ,''tsCi :r ie.' i' G' t..
•t C.
-r J I .•' C
a
,' I • I ( '
'1 t'r:Ii ''
)
C
-- e
• I
V I
I'
billets aftt-r i uttim& a sdndah nod tree %tazlciing 'n the tfl( jfl
forest un flirt--sr •$tk i.ils nrmedite1i prot n-mi tis nlarr it
?fl icb iii. (Ha n,a.' 1
3.e tans. t'. kniA; 'Liit 'c ..st-d 1
N .a
.it.ti 2 r.nt' t sctrdaF',o'i trrt Jtltt UheiCiC ir.' r e
billets nejghmg C Kgs each ttised i n 2 haa a a
andaka d tic.. itu t.. r I rest beañ% 'n.Nr t98 ihe
did not possc ss pcrmit Thc accused had ommittc d hc
iforcsiated offemcs Ibercaftcr a as a rcçst'rcd n
I wes FIR No )004 0 I,s Sccbon Forester C haatu lx
trnestgaticn '.as acer i ci '.m ic rtcsnga mçotiuc 'hc
sandal v x d bil c rc i t u icr pen' litiam C
a. 4 'n i' a' oripict iti ci in.t
j)l :; flflht 1%
I Se . .
1
,r -
'- ''er - . I . r •iA'
I -- a. • ¶ .
i_f
- --.
... ._
--:.-- .,. :.p- 0
-- %
- :' : ' • --. :1 & at ri • • Va 3 ..
) ! ' .. • ••I )
:..1%.. aAt.1?• •: :16 •
1
.I
':... •.$ I
4
rcs cunot mcsscs e a irn° lhc. c idcn c 1 1 the "
1
r ' herr j€ c 'isril 1 --. re alit erci 1U%( ii? asr 'si uvrc 1 hc ' tiaaFvoOI tret It.zil sag n on' tic øtr se '1t•1)ot d tijat %JtIclJ!Wfl'"l Trer 'V.1% t Ut jr, reino d fr.w lan' be€ui'ii S' Nc l°R 'itt ov1t othc i;
ituc sscs hac deposed that sand ahaood tree "as standing in suns Ni' 22t.
ks pet h' iden c f irs nb nn nd tlv
1TflCi%ts ..tiJsrfl t>, 2 wet niugir red
han.t-rl b hr tnenilwrt t
0 'k 'ivaka S..•iiglia '31
4? ii i c s
\ tn .i" ".a. _üv 't i( r. :-- •r .;'
Cot
1
TF * a% t*,.'I p 11 I ni
•. • •. I -- flr
1 0 $ 1' a i
;.1I.
I. t a .1 %.p
Jr
c
IC fin 4
pros(cL ttiuz has slot proud its t45 bnotid
teat ra"I'- cit 'ui-it Tticrefiirt. 1'-rned Irla! I'jdg
shoudqothn, i t 'c i Ii
rh icCt'i'ed islet! 'udgc h.nmt pit r ''itact u 'Li
tcnct nl ''gr '1 ñ j'idgr e'it Ii 1 rd
the sentenc e on an appht. at ion nied 1w the p sutor. 'hic i 1 cot tI-an t tl C i' n sion ol sec tiori 36) (r P.C It rid r tcIg 1 t"i ci cc 4 t' ui dc ' ' mph is'flS)flflr1 fir •' --; gil 4 3 r.' ai 1.1: sflt t' Rs O'Y - .) In? 11
- dec r I SI t ii .'r. pr..-j d .!it- i ;d Ii tj •tt t t
1) 0, 'it . ij t: r a • u't I • I % _r 11 .•-- I .L '1 •1' " ' I. V 1 'I • 'a ' I 6 prrsrtibeti I:'i iii ,ffent -- puni'z.ab'r i."idrr se' t C i 8€ ni the Act Ir e€vr i iCC p n i bmit 1 itt tdeti e v t)I%C' ution vi i1nsces s distr'trreste :ZJVcr t I wcj.'d I ct
2 were taugh'- i-cc! handed vi h-n rhei tiere . ut-ring sandalwood ti cc in Sun n No. ViS Even othenvise. the pC)S%C ssion S saidaiwooci billers nell is an offen t and the smdil'wood tree has burn dcclared as thc property I the .tatc kcc.ncd di had cu sardalwocd t cc n sum e;trn il 1fCC.,1' tVOü1( :ust'I the :tIt !!1' .0 t t•
--Ii err thu v , --id ii + ; s b;it'-- r the % .
4j'
c.ce '1 itt
La '('L's r F d t
•
J' s. ' r • ' --c- c.. I .j. ç' -
•.-r-
c
1
•• .' '' .4 --a
•,• I• 4.
• !'--- '' -
I-- -- i• •• I '
'--.
.11 . I a
.7
.iltrrrci tlir iudtzir.r'it u' enhanc, the r
1 nt-Iit liufli
irnprlsnI '
- '.t.n r Into! Rs 3000 'c. R 00(0
ii a dec i y red OO( ' 1 W9 n as
rhai. afl-raha,r \s St f \1 I
1 ni iscfrsh) i s
held in para
')n gniag through the judgment passed b :hi%
1. owl in the abme said t inuial apped' it s g.uhi' rei F at tin' )U t .ateçc i al anw t hold that th ptttiorer vas ngl-tK oriic.cd br 11 oficnc unicr Sec ion )4 1K. iloici r ookm t thc facts md in nistanc c the :ai! lttrice was altcic'd h thi . ,:iit liv .j're red '. st:fkr R.I 4 sea' hic I, as dIlLjtrd ' in.s in' r' ; t hr ix • lIt €art tt'tl v'1StIIc es r'' 4 : '.€.s s1p t:,:pd 1' •'.)r nont: RI a d anvanl trw "45 cUstCt '10 t 00. ppesrs 'cl r I .4L. 'CC 1St' F 4 t ti • t s'S '' .121 •U •'fjt • i_' --I -- t_A &' 'nt t •h' • -
( I 8 thc iuduincni. nassed i 13 0 2011 On thc othcr hird :ajtrtr(! LI(fQiTIt'fl• t' • h--.trh i:'di"nU that thi lrurnt ,j tj.jj .1 dgc I a., rl.r a.,i tic S urn C. .t ttonsat d 'is to -1 rin' B.c st .jiçia e u nnfr,t m" t.th th' m'nnnn crilteib C pros icled ior an ottenc t punishable under section 86 at tht' Act. thcret( 1 c I A c.iclcz f sentcnce macic In tig Ieirpc-d trial Judge on 14 ($3 ,2011 tannot be sustamed is adverting ti' the cvirlei ice ot prosecution w ties cs fmci F at these lb ant ssc S W( ii uct nten sted n tic SUs. N SS ..t tdsr of flrfl(Itsfl and th'- '-ne 'ba inhInlt't 1 t OdcC' scd c PW1 'iagei'draGaiipitalIegdt s 'unait K fl1' th'p •c, 1 I'--k a h. j%f • sur.c' \ . 2 !. ' .u,ti I 1
'1t - . prt.Jr t)('t ó b 'It. it mbc r (,;
i ak %çr in )C'i •C% (
Lii .1 iç .--t fl
• •
'set t '
I .•4. '•i I- !P.. s TI • Pr
, IC Cf t AC. I 'C I
')l I..
•, • ,
.••
£ .5 5) h.
Si . ;..I•; . tI 1
k I.
9
'li iwd '4111k s',ttt act used - . 2 cutTing tlic
Wi re . '.'_'.u.. d r
.ieg
r
1 1 "il
th
Yr ; Si'rIl p: ...t isv r: n: 4't ht t i p. in_s -I' ..1
rcinotal A sand h o I tree is iot o'th, az otfenL.c but
Jx)SSCSS'C)fl r,f billets s jlsn a.n 'jlience punishable under
4 nor 86 ci th
se -ct Th :' it si fficial had been nformci
abo It thc ppr& ens m fi - c used 1 & ) along with biliLts
ci sanda1conri tier On appe-liension ol act used 1 & 2. the lorest ftjc iai ok their tc us odi and t ci sn d1 ccd biliet, fr's i the i posscsion TI- ridrnce t I',rest oik u S 5t1(.1l 'It n-')uld disclose rust '3 ' S I it'r t.
iF 1 t 3' C. ' I S
'4.QC..Ti tj 7-1(; -e n' .1. ½.dfl:if,ei pfl . it . _'
t. e:. . rI..
L ' ii -i e-tr.t .1 v Ii
t I .' • r --
j
1 gt
(e--
. 1
F.. ' i
e
4 fl . . i
• ;. .i t j_•.%c i'.:
.1 ' T ' I
ta
10
?nXCec' ft Efl tEl. jg
t
0 c rs md ippnhcnded tim
3 S 'hit- ia )%st'S C fl . •flW o. '- it u
8 1cm t ninsel'r c cd''d ut't't tat
•vid n C n" recoid is in' vor1st nt I-u-is to
p1 icc from ht'r
the sandaiw"cxl tree as "ut In nrcic-r in appreciate this
uhmissIon. it is rejrvdnt to stare rht- provisions of section
M4 fh'- ¼t realm' ishn'eurier 84 Pteswrptior m asc f sir dhio d IAhercin r pncdings aktn ndcr his c r is or semienc.c 01 tn; thing lone '.rnds r hi A t under drfl isix tot 'he tl.'le :x ,ng ;fl mt-ret- a question nfl5f% as Ti, bether rj.fl' satigjaiwnr,d is The pr'pei" t ti-it State 13 Goleinmilni fl shall
-r'n ti-- ,j-r-q--i •s pr.nr' bt' jqts 'Pv' r - b' lit Pt e.itc I '1 Ut fr I, sect 0- ( - •tt ' .11 f • r --em - -. -- --
S '-1
-
- • •__i I - - S
•• ' '
T
1
- t).. • -i --- - i- --: ;. 1
p 5 - • r_ •t.-• -
* 5- t -
e a- J
11
20. in the case on hand, the burden of proof lies on accused 1 & 2. In the case on hand, accused 1 & 2 have not lead evidence to establish that sandalwood tree was not the property of the State.
21. Section 86 of the Karnataka Forest Act, was amended by Act No.20 of 2001 by enhancing minimum sentence for the first offence to 5 years and also minimum fine for a sum of Rs.50,000/-. This has prompted the learned trail judge to alter the judgment contrary to the provisions of section 362 Cr.P.C.
22. In view of the above discussion, I hold that prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused 1 & 2 have committed offences punishable under sections 84 and 86 of the Act and also an offence punishable under section 379 IPC. The learned trial Judge having sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 years and pay fine of Rs.5,000/- by judgment dated 13/09/2011, should not have altered the judgment on 14/09/2011 by enhancing the sentence of imprisonment 000 to from 3 years to 5 years and fine from Rs.h A Rs.50,000/ -. N' tkkrt vv'& 12
23. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER The judgment of conviction of accused for an offences punishable under sections 84 and 86 of the Act and for an offence under section 379 IPC is confirmed. The appeal is accepted in part The judgment altered on 14/09/2011, sentencing accused 1 & 2 to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of five years and pay rme of Rs.50,000/- for period of with default sentence of simple imprisonment for a period of one year for an offence under section 86 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 is set aside. The judgment of conviction made on 13.09.2011, sentencing accused 1 & 2 to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years and pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for offences punishable under sections 84 & 86 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 is confirmed. Accused 1 & 2 are given,set off as provided under section 428 Cr.P.C.
aal--
JUDGE Vmb