Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Prince Vs. State of Kerala

Prince vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Dec 19, 2013
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1102421

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Prince

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....of the kerala forest act is pending before the autorised officer. the learned counsel for the petitioner challenges the said order. the allegation is that the vehicle of the petitioner transported timber without prior sanction from the forest department under the provisions of the kerala preservation of trees act, 1986 and the provisions of the promotion of tree growth in non-forest area act, 2005. it is contended that the proceedings under section 61 a of the kerala forest act is not applicable in respect of the proceedings and the rejection of the petition filed under sec.451 of the cr.p.c by the order in cmp no. 696/2012 is opposed to law and facts. the counsel for the petitioner contended that the act of the respondents alleging violation of the provisions of kerala trees act,1986 and the provisions of the kerala forest act cannot apply in respect of the timber crl. m.c no. 5560 of 2013 2 seized. the counsel for the petitioner relied on the decision reported in tomy v. state of kerala, 2011(3) klt682 in such circumstances, the counsel contented that the proceedings under section 61 a of the forest act is liable to be set aside.2. the learned magistrate passed an order without referring to any of the contention raised by the petitioner. in the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the view that the matter requires re-consideration. the learned magistrate shall consider the contentions and shall pass orders a fresh within a period of one month from today. the order dated 01.06.2012 in cmp no.696/2012 is quashed. sd/-harun-ul-rashid, judge. lsn

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE19H DAY OF DECEMBER201328TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 Crl.MC.No. 5560 of 2013 () -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER

IN CMP6962012 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, DEVICULAM CRIME NO. 60/2011 OF DEVIKULAM FOREST RANGE OFFICE , DEVICULAM --------------- PETITIONER(S)/CLAIM PETITIONER: --------------------------------------------------- PRINCE, AGED37YEARS, S/O.SANKARAN, RESIDING AT CHELATTU HOUSE, 1000 ACRE KARA, MANNAMKANDOM VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOICE GEORGE RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S) & STATE: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

2. THE RANGE OFFICER, DEVIKULAM FOREST RANGE OFFICE, DEVIKULAM P.O IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN688586. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.S.HYMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON1912-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PJ Crl.MC.No. 5560 of 2013 () ------------------------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- ANNEXURE A1. COPY OF THE FOREST OFFENCE SEIZURE REPORT PREPARED UNDER SECTION52OF THE KERALA FOREST ACT, 1961 FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, DEVIKULAM. ANNEXURE A2. COPY OF THE PETITION IN CMP NO.696/2012 IN OR NO.60/2011 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, DEVIKULAM. ANNEXURE A3. COPY OF THE REPORT DATED2412.12 FILED IN CMP NO.696/2012 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, DEVIKULAM. ANNEXURE A4. COPY OF THE REPORT DATED105.12 FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, DEVIKULAM IN CMP NO.696/2012. ANNEXURE A5. COPY OF THE ORDER

DATED0106.2012 IN CMP NO.696/2012 IN OR NO.60/2011 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CSLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, DEVIKULAM. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl. M.C No. 5560 of 2013 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of December, 2013. ORDER

Petitioner filed CMP No. 696/2012 in O.R No. 60/2011 of the Forest Range Office, Devikulam before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Devikulam seeking interim custody of the vehicle. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application finding that, the proceedings under Section 61A of the Kerala Forest Act is pending before the Autorised Officer. The learned counsel for the petitioner challenges the said order. The allegation is that the vehicle of the petitioner transported timber without prior sanction from the forest department under the provisions of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, 1986 and the provisions of the Promotion of Tree Growth in Non-Forest Area Act, 2005. It is contended that the proceedings under Section 61 A of the Kerala Forest Act is not applicable in respect of the proceedings and the rejection of the petition filed under Sec.451 of the Cr.P.C by the order in CMP No. 696/2012 is opposed to law and facts. The counsel for the petitioner contended that the act of the respondents alleging violation of the provisions of Kerala Trees Act,1986 and the provisions of the Kerala Forest Act cannot apply in respect of the timber Crl. M.C No. 5560 of 2013 2 seized. The counsel for the petitioner relied on the decision reported in Tomy v. State of Kerala, 2011(3) KLT682 In such circumstances, the counsel contented that the proceedings under Section 61 A of the Forest Act is liable to be set aside.

2. The learned Magistrate passed an order without referring to any of the contention raised by the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the matter requires re-consideration. The learned Magistrate shall consider the contentions and shall pass orders a fresh within a period of one month from today. The order dated 01.06.2012 in CMP No.696/2012 is quashed. Sd/-HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. lsn

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial