N my ..._ «ww J ‘ @. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (227) No.3791 OF 2008’ Aggellanf PETITIONER 2. 1. Kala, Bandi, 5/0 5/0 Muya, Ndnya, Aged Aged about abouf 46 35 years. years. 3. Deva, 5/0 Madka, Aged about 35 year-s. AH of by casfe Madiya, R/o Edpal, P.S. Gadir‘as, Tahsil DanTewada, Disff. Soufh Bas’rar (C.G.) ‘ Vs RESPONDENTS 1. Sfafe -of i _ Mr. A.S. Kachchawaha, Dy. Adv. General. : For responden’r No.1 “to 3. O R D E R (Passed on £7’2J‘uly, 2008) Dhirendra Mishra, J 1, The pefi'rioners by the ins’ranf pefifion have impugned The order dafed 20.11.2006,(Annexure P—5) passed by The Collecfor, Soufh Bas’rar, Dam‘ewada whereby fhe Collector has imposed a penalfy of Rs.5,000/— against The pe’ri‘l‘ioners and confiscated teak trees standing over the land of the m, petitioners, which were illegally fallen, under Section 241 (4) of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short ‘Code'). The petitioners have also impugned the order of Board of Revenue dated 28.9.2007 (Annexure P-7) whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioners has been dismissed and the order of the Collector has been upheld. .Mr. Patankar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners vehemently argu‘ed that the proceedings under Section 241 of ' the Clode is criminal in nature, therefore, burden of proving illegal felling ofl'trees by the petitioners lies on tlhe ll/ (i ‘ Collector, soufh Bastar, (C.G.). 2. The Revenue Board, Circuif Jagdalpur‘ (C.G.) 3. The Collecfor, Soufh Bastqr, Dan’rewoda (6.6.). Mr. PR. Page 2 of 4 . prosecu‘rion. ~The prosecufion has failed To prove i’rs case beyond reasonable doubf as The witnesses i.e. Pa‘twar'i and Naib Tehsildar' examined by the prosecufion, have cafegor‘ically s’ra’red Thaf fhey .have noT seen The pe’riTioner‘s felling The Trees and fhey do no’r have any personal knowledge regarding felling of Trees. However, learned revenue oul’hori’ries relying upon The alleged confession of The pe’ri’rioners Thm‘ they were ‘ responsible for felling of trees, have held that the petitioners had cut the teak trees. He further argued that the petitioners have already deposited the fine amount of Rs.5,000/-, however, they being Bhumiswami of land over which the trees were standing, were entitled to the cost of timber and the trees in question were not liable for confiscation . Heard learned counsel for the petitioners on admission. . The Naib Tehsildar, Kuankonda/Katekalyan (Tappa) on the basis of report dated 14.9.2004 of the Halka Patwari, Bade—Gudra registered a case of illegal felling of trees and summoned the petitioners vide order dated 24.6.2005. Their statements on oath were recorded in which they admitted that they have felled 9 teak trees standing over their bhumiswami land for the purposes of sale. They also stated that they were not \aware of the rules 6i regulations regarding felling of trees and selling the same to the State. After recording that the petitioners have contravened the provisions of Sections 240 & 241 of the Code, the matter was referred to the Collector through the Sub Divisional Officer, South Bastar, Dantewada. .The Collector, South Bastar, Dantewada issued show cause notice dated 31.5.2006 to the petitioners. The petitioners in their reply of Annexure P-2 accepted that the trees standing over their Bhumiswami land were illegally cut, however, they denied that they were responsible for the same and took a defence thpt the trees were cut by some unidentified person. / \x /\ K» V / . !L ‘ U Page 3 of4 If was fur‘rher s‘rafed Thaf since ’rhey were arresfed in connection wifh illegal feHing of frees over fhe governmen’r Iand and were in jail fill 28.1.2006 and released only affer They were acquiT‘red, ’rherefore, fhey could no? make any complaint againsf fhe felling of Trees. 6. During enquiry Halka Pal‘wari Shri Suman Ram Hidko, Revenue Inspector Shri T.K. Pa’rel and Naib Tehsildar Shri R.N. Sai were examined by The prosecuiion, whereas, The pe’rilioners herein examined fhemselves in Their defence. The Naib Tehsildar in his s’ra’remen‘l on oa’rh has sfa‘l’ed ’rhaf he had recorded fhe sfafemenfs of The petitioners on oath at the time of enquiry in which they confessed their guilt and stated that they shall not repeat the offence in future. However, all the prosecution witnesses have admitted that they did not personally see the petitioners felling trees. 7. Learned Collector considering the statements on oath recorded by the Tehsildar and further considering that illegal felling of trees was done on or before 4.9.2004, the spot panchnama was recorded in the presence of the petitioners and that the petitioners were incarcerated in jail only from 10.8.2005, the defence of the petitioners for not reporting the matter to the authorities immediately after felling of trees was not considered bonafide and relying upon the statements of the government witnesses passed the impugned order confiscating the timber and imposed a ,penalty of Rs.5,000/-. Appeal preferred against the said order has also been dismissed by the Board of Revenue by recording the similar findings. 8. In view of the admitted fact that the trees were fallen on or before 4.9.2004 and the petitioners in their statements on oath during enquiry before the Naib Tehsildar confessed felling of trees, their contention that though the trees standing ,on their- land were fallen but they w/er'e/ivAngt / fallen The frees and Thaf fhey could not report the maffer to ’rhe Collecfor as They were in jail in The relevant period, is no? born ouf from The evidence available on record and learned CollecTor has righTly disbelleved The defence of The peTiTI’oners in This‘regard. 9, Therefore, in The considered opinion of This CourT, There is no illegaliTy, infirmiTy or jurisdicfional error commiTTed by The courTs below in passing Theimpugned orders of Annexure P-5 and P—7, warranfing inTerference in The exercise of w; ‘ ‘\i \‘i Dhirendra Mishra JurisdicTion under ArTicle 227 of The ConsTiTuTion of India. The peTiTion has no merif, The same deserves To be dismissed and accordingly, iT is hereby dismissed aT The admission sTage. 10. No order as To cosTs. Sd/_ Jildge Roshan/— ~