Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr. Appeal No.14 of 2000. Dated of Decision: January 10, 2008. State of H.P. ……… Appellant. Versus Damodar. ………. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the Appellant : Mr. V.K.Verma, Add. Advocate General, with Mr. D.S. Nainta, Deputy Advocate General. For the Respondent: None. Surinder Singh, J. (oral) : Heard and gone through the record. The respondent Damodar was charge-sheeted alongwith Prem Singh, his co-accused under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 41 & 42 of the Indian Forests Act, allegedly for committing theft of Simbal tree, which was converted into 24 scants and 4 logs and transported in contravention of H.P. Forest Produce Transit (Land Routes) Rules, 1978, in a Tractor, on 8.3.1993, at about 12.30 A.M. The tractor was intercepted by Chaman Lal, Inspector (PW6), who was on patrol duty near Chitrokhari Chowk, 2 Sundernagar. The respondent Damodar Dass, driver could not produce the permit, as such, the timber as well as the tractor were taken into possession. On further inquiry, Damodar Dass, respondent informed the police that the said timber was loaded into the tractor by his co-accused Prem Singh, to take it to the saw- mill. Finding a case under the aforesaid sections, the challan was prepared against the respondent and his co-accused Prem Singh and was presented in the court for their trial. At the end of the trial, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sundernagar, acquitted Prem Singh, however, convicted Damodar Dass. Damodar Dass had filed an appeal against his conviction and sentence and on 17.2.1999, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi, accepted his appeal. Consequently, his conviction and sentence were set-aside and he was acquitted, against which the instant appeal has been filed by the State. No-one has appeared for the respondent however, I have heard Shri V.K. Verma, learned Additional Advocate General with Mr. D.S. Nainta, learned Deputy Advocate General and re-appraised the evidence on record. 3 To substantiate the charge, the prosecution has examined Shri Bhiri Singh as PW-1, who has not supported the case of the prosecution, but he has deposed in the court that the Simbal tree, standing on the land was owned by him, it had fallen down due to the vagaries of nature and was converted into 24 slippers and 4 logs by him. Prem Singh was engaged by him to take the said timber to the saw-mill for sawing. The Prosecution did not produce any witness to prove that the said tree was felled from the government forest to prove the offence of theft. In so far as the transporting of this timber by the respondent is concerned, the Investigating Officer has intercepted this tractor at Chitrokhari Chowk, Sundernagar. There is no evidence to prove the breach of transit rules framed under Sections 41 and 42 of the Forest Act to the effect that the timber was transported from one revenue estate to another revenue estate. The first appellate Court had taken the cognizance of this fact and found that there was nothing to suggest if the place of lifting of timber and the recovery of the said timber were situated in different revenue estates. Even to this 4 effect, there was no investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer. Thus the whole gamut of the entire discussion leads me to this conclusion that the timber found in the tractor was not having any illicit origin and the prosecution crumbled down for want of proof of movement of the timber from one revenue estate to another revenue estate, more specifically when PW-1 is a right-holder of the same revenue estate under whose direction it was being carried to the Saw-mill. Therefore, I do not find any perversity in the impugned judgment of acquittal, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The respondent is discharged of his bail bonds, entered upon by him at any stage during the proceeding of this case. Send down the records. January 10, 2008. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.