SATTAR Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
State of Uttarakhand and another
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) By way of present application / petition, moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks to quash and set aside the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 10 of 2007, State vs Sattar and others, under Sections 27, 29, 31 and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, pertaining to Range Dholakhand, Rajaji National Park, District Haridwar, pending in the court of I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar.
(2.) A complaint was lodged by the Forest Guard of Singli Beat against Sattar (present applicant), Zulfan and Qurban in respect of offences committed under Sections 27, 29, 31 and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act on 02.04.2004, in the court of I Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar. The allegation against the accused persons, in nutshell, was that they were cutting trees in Rajaji National Park. When Forest officials chased them, they fled away and could not be apprehended. Eight quintals of timber was recovered on the spot. The accused persons were responsible for felling and cutting of 10 Teak trees. The cognizance on the complaint dated 02.04.2004 was taken by learned Magistrate on 23.04.2007.
(3.) The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no reasons were assigned by the court below while taking cognizance. The argument of learned counsel for the applicant was based upon the fact that the maximum punishment prescribed under Section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act is imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine which may extend to 25,000/- rupees or with both and therefore, according to Section 468 of Cr.P.C., the cognizance should have been taken by the Court within three years of the alleged commission of offence.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.