IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No.: 252/2000. Reserved on :4.1.2008 Decided on:25.2.2008. State of H.P. … … Appellant. Versus Thakur Dass & another. … … Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellant: Mr.M.A. Khan & Ms. Meenakashi Sharma, Dy. Advocate Generals. For the Respondents: Mr. Dinesh Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Ajay Kochar, Advocate for respondent No.2. Rajiv Sharma, Judge: The respondents were prosecuted in CC. No.3-S/7 of 1993 under sections 420, 218, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and under Rules 11/20 and 18/20 of the H.P. Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules 1978 in the Court of Special Judge (Forest) Shimla and were acquitted on 2.11.1999. Hence, this appeal by the State. The brief facts as gathered from the judgment of the trial court are that the accused persons were charge-sheeted for exporting 71 number of scants of chil in excess from Summer Hill Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No - 2 - Railway Station to Jagadhari and Abohar on 4 railway receipts on the authority of the permit No. 55/81-82 which was not endorsed to the railway station and the same were exported after the validity in violation of the H.P. Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules 1978. During the investigation, the statements of the witnesses under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded and after receiving the report of the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents and completion of investigation, the challan was presented before the trial court. Sh. R.M. Dua died during the pendency of the trial and his name was deleted from the list of accused. In order to bring home the offence against the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 37 witnesses. The accused were examined under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. They have denied that there was any conspiracy and they have further denied that the timber in excess in the quantity as mentioned in the permit which was not endorsed to the railway station had been exported. They have also denied having prepared incorrect record. No defence witness was examined by them. The trial court acquitted the respondents on 2.11.1999. The learned Deputy Advocate General had strenuously argued that the prosecution has proved the case against the accused. Mr. Dinesh Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Ajay Kochar, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents had supported the judgment dated 2.11.1999. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record carefully. - 3 - PW-1 Sh. K.C. Nandwani and PW-31 Sh. M.A. Siddqui had conducted the vigilance inquiry with regard to irregularities committed by railway staff while booking the timber at the railway station and submitted his report Ex.PW-1/B. PW-1 Sh. K.C. Nandwani has stated that he did not ascertain from the DRM’s office as to whether Civil Restrictions have actually been notified to the Station Master or not and he has also admitted that any notification or restrictions issued by any department regarding restricted goods will not bound the Station Master unless the same are notified by the railway authorities. PW-31 Sh. M.A. Siddiqui has admitted that Station Masters are not bound by any clarifications which are not notified by the railway authorities through railway station. Thus, it is evident that restrictions, if any, on the movement of any goods to be transported through the railways are to be imposed, the same are to be notified to the Station Master through the higher authorities or Railway Board. PW-21 Sh. Bhupinder Singh has admitted that transportation of goods through railway is regulated in accordance with the provisions contained under the Railway Commercial Manual Volume-II. PW-1 Sh. K.C. Nandwani and PW-31 M.A. Siddqui have admitted in their statements that on the authority of export permit No. 55/81-82, Ex.PW1/J, the timber could be booked from Summer Hill to outside Himachal Pradesh for the export of 834 scants. Thus, the trial court had come to a just conclusion that the accused cannot be held guilty of violating H.P. Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules, 1978. PW-18 Sh. D.C. Khanduria has admitted that he had issued the permit Ex.PW-1/J on the basis of the application preferred by Sh. Mansa Ram. PW-24 Sh. Charan Dass has - 4 - admitted in his cross-examination that as per note No.25 of Ex.PW-18/C, Mansa Ram had desired to transport timber to Yamuna Nagar through Railway Station, Summer Hill. PW-1 Sh. K.C. Nandwani and PW-31 Sh. M.A. Siddqui have stated that validity of the permit is to be seen at the time of registration and not at the time of actual loading. They have stated that the first entry is made in the priority register and demand is made to the DRM’s office for the supply of wagon which is supplied on priority basis and the supply of the wagon is not within the control of Station master and he has no authority to cancel the wagon unless cancelled by the parties. The fact when the goods were offered for booking and when the indent was placed or forwarding note was filled in can be easily seen from the priority register. Sh. K.C. Nandwani and M.A. Siddiqui have not checked and seen the priority register at the time of holding vigilance inquiry. PW-37 Sh. Daulat Ram, I.O. has admitted that the timber has reached the railway station, Summer Hill within the validity of the permit. The trial court on correct appreciation of the evidence has come to the right conclusion that Ex.PW-1/E to Ex.PW-1/H had been booked and the indent for transporting the timber had been filled within the validity of the permit. Sh. K.C. Nandwani (PW-1) had admitted in his cross- examination that to avoid uneven load and to use the wagon to its full capacity, the timber is cut into pieces and for this purpose, scant means any piece of timber, irrespective of its size. He has also admitted in his cross-examination that in order to avoid derailment and to use the wagon to its full capacity, sometimes timber is cut into pieces and he has further admitted that the - 5 - railway receipts are not the conclusive proof regarding exact volume of the timber booked for transportation. The prosecution has only taken into consideration the number of scants instead of taking into consideration the volume also. Thus, the possibility of the scants being cut into pieces to facilitate the loading of wagon to its full capacity and to avoid derailment cannot be ruled out. If the scants are cut into pieces, the number of scants will increase but their volume will remain the same. The prosecution has not led any evidence that the volume of the timber had increased during the transportation. Accordingly, there is no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed. The bail bonds furnished by the accused- respondents stand discharged. February 25, 2008. (Rajiv Sharma) *Awasthi*. Judge