Jasrath Singh and Others vs State of U.P.

P. K. Jain, J.—Heard Sri P.N. Lal, learned Counsel for the revisionistsjsllh1 learned A.G. A.

The revisionists were convicted under Section 26 of the Indian Forest Act by the C.J.M., Pilibhit vide judgment and order dated 10284 and were sentenced to undergo RI for 3 months and pay fine of Rs. 200/ each and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 10 days.

Appeal filed by the revisionists was dismissed by the appellate Court and the judgment and order of the trial Court was confirmed.

Present revision has been filed challenging the judgments and orders of the trial Court as well as of the appellate Court. Revision is pressed on the ground that the revisionists were not apprehended, at the spot and no recovery was made from the revisionists and that P.W. 2 was a witness of seizure and should not have been made the Investigating Officer. Learned A.G.A. contends that there is no illegality in the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court.

It appears from perusal of the judgments and orders of the Courts below that P.W 2 Tilak Ram had simply recovered the wood from the brick kiln and he had not apprehended any accused at the time of recovery. He is not a witness of illegal felling of the trees by the accused persons. Investigation done by him does not at all prejudice the revisionists. As regards the next question it is true that no recovery was made from the possession of the accused persons but P.W. 2 who is a witness of felling of the trees has nominated the accused persons in his report made to the Ranger office about the incident. There is thus no illegality in the impugned judgments and orders of the Courts below.

The appeal was dismissed on 6884. The revisionists were directed to be released on bail by order dated 14884 and must have been released at least 23 days thereafter. The revisionists have already been in jail for about 10 days. The offence was committed in the year 1980 about 17 and a half years back. No useful purpose shall be served by sending the revisionists to jail after lapse of 17 years.

The revision is partly allowed. Conviction of the revisionists under Section 26 of the Indian Forest Act is confirmed. However, the order of sentence is modified. The revisionists are sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the period they have already been in jail. The sentence of fine and order of awarding compensation shall also stand set aside.

Revision partly allowed.