Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 18TH PHALGUNA, 1944 TO QUASH O.R. NO.19/2020 OF FOREST RANGE OFFICE, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. PETITIONER/4TH ACCUSED: SURENDRAN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. VASUDEVAN, AREEPARAYIL HOUSE, KALLIMALI KARA, RAJAKKAD VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 566. BY ADV. LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031. 2 FOREST RANGE OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, DEVIKULAM P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 613. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.P. PRASANTH ATTACHED TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER (FORESTS) SRI. NAGARAJ NARAYANAN THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: -2-
ORDER
Dated this the 9th day of March, 2023 The petitioner is the 4th accused in O.R. No.19 of 2020 of the Forest Range Office, Devikulam, registered for the offence punishable under Section 27(1)(e)(iii) of the Kerala Forest Act. The crime and occurrence report are registered on the allegation that the petitioner's vehicle was used for transporting wooden logs cut down from patta land falling within the Cardamom Hill Reserve.
2. When the matter was taken up for consideration, learned Special Government Pleader submitted, on instructions that the final report is filed and the petitioner does not figure as an accused therein.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner's vehicle having been seized based on registration of crime, the Crl.M.C. may not be disposed of based only on the fact that the petitioner is not named as an accused in the final report. It is submitted that, going -3- by the prosecution allegations, the trees were cut from patta land and hence, the offence under Section 27(1)(e)
(iii) is not attracted. Even if the land is within the
Cardamom Hill Reserve, the violation can only be with respect to the provisions of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act. In support of this contention, reliance is placed on the order in C.R.P. No.60 of 2011 wherein, the learned Single Judge of this Court, after referring to the decision in Tomy v. State of Kerala [2011 (3) KLT 682] and the Division Bench decision in Joseph v. State of Kerala [2005 (4) KLT 504] held that, cutting of trees from cardamon estates will not constitute an offence under
Section 27(1)(e)(iii) of the Kerala Forest Act. It is also held
that, as the law now stands, in view of Section 5 of the Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, if a tree standing in a Cardamon Hill Reserve or any other area notified as cultivated with cardamom is cut, only offences under Section 5 of Kerala Preservation of Trees Act gets attracted and not the penal provisions under the Kerala
-4- Forest Act.
4. I am in respectful agreement with the above decision. I am also bound by the observations of the Division Bench to the same effect in Joseph (supra).
5. Heard the learned Special Government Pleader also.
6. In view of the settled legal position, further proceedings in O.R. No.19 of 2020 with respect the offence under Section 27(1)(e)(iii) of the Kerala Forest Act, as against the petitioner, is quashed.
The Crl.M.C. is disposed of with the above observation. Sd/- V.G. ARUN JUDGE bpr -5- APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 7030/2022 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES Annexure1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE OCCURRENCE REPORT IN O.R NO.19/2020 OF DEVIKULAM FOREST RANGE Annexure2 TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR WITH RESPECT TO O.R NO.19/2020 OF DEVIKULAM FOREST RANGE OFFICE Annexure3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO CMP NO.1178/2020 OF JFMC,ADIMALY Annexure4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, MUNNAR - DEVIKULAM DATED 15.03.2021 Annexure5 TRUE COPY OF THE GAZATTE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 25.07.2018