Criminal Misc. No. M-14600 of 2011 (1) IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-14600 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 20.7.2011 Kulwant Singh .. Petitioner vs State of Haryana .. Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. S. S. Dinarpur, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Godara, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal, J. The petitioner, who is an Ex-Sarpanch of common Gram Panchayat of two villages namely, Peerbholi and Uddhamgarh, is an accused in FIR No. 59 dated 27.4.2011, registered under Sections 406, 420, 379, 120-B IPC at Police Station Sadhaura, District Yamuna Nagar, along with Ex. Panch and two Block Development and Panchayat Officers. The FIR was registered on the complaint of Chief Minister's Flying Squad with the allegations that 366 trees standing on the panchayat land were illegally cut. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had already brought to the notice of the police authorities that certain residents of village Uddhamgarh are trying to cut the trees from the panchayat land but no action was taken thereon. In the writ petition filed by one of the resident of village Peerbholi, a direction was issued to the Deputy Commissioner, Yamuna Nagar to look into the matter, who opined that there was no illegality in the auction proceedings as the trees were sold for ` 6,75,000/- as against the value assessed by the Forest Department at ` 3,60,000/-. He has been implicated in the FIR due to political rivalry. An Criminal Misc. No. M-14600 of 2011 (2) enquiry was conducted by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer and loss of `, 98,820/- was assessed on account of illegal falling of 366 trees. Six persons were found to be guilty and a sum of ` 16,470/- was directed to be recovered from each of them. Two of them, namely, Ami Chand and Mauldeen the Contractor, had even deposited their share of money. The petitioner is not at guilty of the offence. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the petitioner, who was the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat at the relevant time, got the extra trees cut through the Contractor with his connivance. The other Panch was also involved. Reliance made on the enquiry conducted by the Block Development and Panchayat Officer initially is meaningless as subsequently the petitioner, two other accused and two Block Development and Panchayat Officers, Sadhaura, who were posted at that relevant time at that place, were found involved in the case. Instead of lodging the FIR for illegally cutting of trees, the Block Development and Panchayat Officer assessed the value of the trees, and tried to hush up the matter by passing the buck on others. It is a case which has been registered after thorough investigation by the Sub Inspector in the Chief Minister's Flying Squad and prima facie case is made out against the petitioner. His custodial interrogation is required to find out the truth. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he wishes to withdraw the present petition. Dismissed as withdrawn. 20.7.2011 (Rajesh Bindal ) vs Judge