Govt. Appeal (SJ) No.53 OF 1994
[Appeal against the judgment and order dated 2.4.1994 passed by the
Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Gaya in Forest Case No.117 of 1991
Trial No.146 of 1994]
THE STATE OF BIHAR ------------------------------- Appellant
Versus
1. MOTI LAL AGRAWALSON OF ARJUN DAS AGRAWAL
2. SANJAY AGRAWAL SON OF MOTILAL AGRAWAL, BOTH
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE/ MOHALLA KATARI ROAD, P.S. CIVIL LINE,
DISTRICT GAYA TURN GAYA
---------------------------- Respondents
For the Appellant : Mr. R.B. Roy 'Raman', Addl. P.P.
For the Respondents : Mr. Subodh Kumar No.1, Advocate
---------
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH
Anjana This is an Appeal against the judgment dated 2.4.1994
Prakash, J:
passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Gaya in Forest
Case No.117 of 1991 Trial No.146 of 1994, by which he
acquitted the accused persons of the charges u/s.41 of the
Indian Forest Act and Sections 5 and 12 of the Bihar Forest
Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984.
The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on
13.7.1990 the factory of one Gopal Katha was inspected and
some illegal khair wood was lying in the factory, for which no
valid paper was produced by the staff present there.
The prosecution examined seven witnesses in support
of the prosecution case, whereas the defence examined two
witnesses on its behalf.
-2-
The Trial Magistrate had acquitted the accused
persons on the ground that non-production of the transit permit
at the time of inspection of the factory before the Range Officer
was not a requirement in law and he had not checked the
registers of the factory to verify that the khair wood lying in the
premises was not explained in the book of record maintained
by the factory. Further the court was of the view that no offence
u/s.12 of the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act,
1984 was made out, since it was not the case of the
prosecution that the accused persons were engaged in retail
sale of forest produce without obtaining licence from the Forest
Department.
On going through the evidence on record and the
judgment of acquittal, I find no perversity in the same. I am of
the opinion that the accused persons were acquitted for the
good reasons, which cannot be interfered with and there is no
reason to differ with the finding arrived at by the Trial Court.
In view of the discussions noted above, the appeal is
dismissed.
( Anjana Prakash, J. )
Patna High Court
Dated, 29th March, 2011.
NAFR/ Narendra/