IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER FRIDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 28TH BHADRA 1930 CRL.A.No. 828 of 2001(C) ------------------------ CC.273/1996 of JUDL.MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-II(FOREST OFFENCES),PUNALUR .................... APPELLANT: ------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.C.M.KAMAPPU. RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. KUTTY KANI BHARATHI KANI, THADATHRIKKATHU VEEDU, VITTIKAVU KANI SETTLEMENT, IDINJAR, THENNOOR VILLAGE, PERINGAMALA SECTION AND BEAT, NEDUMANGADU TALUK. 2. RAGHAVAN KANI SUKUMARAN KANI, THADATHIKATHU VEEDU, IDINGAR VITTIKAVU, PALODE, RESERVE DO. DO. 3. MEERASAHIB MUHAMMED SALI, IDINJAR RODARIKATHU VEEDU, PERINGAMALA VILLAGE DO. DO. ADV. SRI.D.KISHORE THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.A.No. 828 of 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal which is at the instance of the Forest Range Officer, Palode Forest Range, is directed against the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court in a prosecution under the Kerala Forest Act. By the impugned judgment the trial court found that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge against respondents/accused under Section 27(1)(e), III and IV of the Kerala Forest Act 1962. 2. The prosecution case in brief was that the accused had trespassed into the reserve forest area and cut down an anjili tree, resulting in a total loss of Rs.1500/- to the Government. 3. The prosecution had examined only Pw.1. Ext.P1 mahazar was also marked in the case. According to Pw.1, he had visited the alleged scene of occurrence along with two of his colleagues on receipt of secret information that accused had trespassed into the forest area and cut down an anjili tree on September 18, 1993. He had further stated that Ext.P1 mahazar was prepared by him. He did not arrest the accused. Before visiting the scene of occurrence he had enquired about the matter from accused 1 and 2. He further stated that he had prepared Crl.A.828/2001. 2 Form I report. He also stated that the workers of accused No.3 who had allegedly purchased the tree had cut down the tree. The alleged weapon used for commission of the crime was also not recovered. Pw.1 also stated that further investigation in the case was conducted by the Section Forester and Range Officer. But significantly no other witness was examined in the case. 4. The prosecution had also not produced the notification to show that the alleged scene of occurrence was inside the forest. In fact the definite case of the accused was that they had not trespassed into the forest area and the tree in question was cut down from the settlement area which belonged to them. 5. In the absence of any satisfactory evidence, I am satisfied that the court below was justified in acquitting the accused. I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of acquittal. Therefore the criminal appeal is dismissed. A.K. Basheer Judge. an.