Bombay High Court
Dattu Kisan Jadhav vs The Range Forest Officer Jalgaon ... on 16 November, 2016
Bench: V.K. Jadhav
crwp51.09
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 51 OF 2009
Dattu s/o Kisan Jadhav
Age 34 years, Occ. Business,
R/o. Karkhel, Tq. Ashti,
District Beed ...Petitioner
versus
1. The Range Forest Officer,
Mobile Squad, Bhusawal
Jalgaon Forest Division,
Jalgaon
Through Ejaz Shafi Peerzada
2. The State of Maharashtra
(Copy to be served on P.P.
High Court of Bombay,
Bench at Aurangabad) ...Respondents
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. A M Gaikwad
APP for Respondent No.2: Mr. A.R. Kale
.....
CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.
DATED : 16th NOVEMBER, 2016
ORAL JUDGMENT:-
1. By this writ petition, the petitioner-original accused, is seeking
quashing and setting aside the complaint bearing R.C.C. No. 60 of
2008, later on, after committal, bearing Sessions Case No. 12 of
2008 pending before the learned Sessions Court, at Jalgaon.
2. Brief facts giving rise to the present criminal writ petition are as
crwp51.09
follows:-
a) On 1.1.2008, Gram Panchayat of village Nanded, Tq.
Dharangaon, District Jalgaon, published a notice in daily newspaper
"Punyanagari" thereby calling tenders for cutting and removing thorny
bushes and herbs on the land belonging to the village Panchayat. In
the said notice, auction was kept on 7.1.2008. The present petitioner
as well as other 4 to 5 contractors, have participated in the tender
process and since the petitioner was the highest bidder, quoted an
amount of Rs.3,21,000/-, his bid was accepted and said tender was
allotted to the petitioner. Even the petitioner has deposited amount of
Rs.1,72,000/- in Gram Panchayat, Nanded and also commenced the
work of cutting the bushes and herbs. However, respondent No.1,
Range Forest Officer, on his own, has filed a complaint before the
J.M.F.C. Amalner, District Jalgaon, which is numbered as R.C.C. No.
60 of 2008 against the petitioner accused and 100 unknown persons,
alleging therein that the petitioner has committed a grave crime in
violation of provisions of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and without
obtaining prior permission of Maharashtra Forest Department viz. the
Deputy Conservator of Forests, Jalgaon Division, prior to cutting of
standing trees, numbering more than 2012. It has also alleged in the
complaint that the illicit falling of the trees standing on the Gairan
lands resulted in wanton damage to the local ecology and all the area
crwp51.09
has undergone irreparable loss. The wild life habitant and natural
surroundings have suffered greatly. It has also alleged that the
petitioner has violated the provisions of Sections 41, 35 of Indian
Forest Act, 1927, the provisions of Rule 66, 88(1) and 78 of the
Bombay Forest Rules, 1942, the provisions of Wild Life (Protection)
Act 1972 as well as the amended Sections 9, 39, 51 and 52 of the
Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act 2002.
b.
The learned J.M.F.C. Amalner, by order dated 1.4.2008 has
issued process against the petitioner-accused for the offences
punishable under Sections 379, 395, 120-B of I.P.C. and Sections 3,
14, 51, 52 of Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act 2002 and Rules
41, 35, 66, 88 (1) and 78 of Bombay Forest Rules. It appears that,
now the learned Magistrate has committed the case to the Court of
Sessions, as some of the offence are exclusively triable by the court
of Sessions and thus, the case is now pending before the Sessions
Court, bearing Sessions Case No. 12 of 2008.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Chief
Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon had granted permission to
Gram Panchayat, Nanded regarding falling of 3200 thorny trees/
bushes standing on the Gairan land, vide letter dated 12.12.2006.
On 14.3.2008, respondent No.1, who happened to be Range Forest
crwp51.09
Officer, had been to the office of village Panchayat and inquired
about the work of cutting of thorny bushes and herbs and he had
illegally demanded Rs.50,000/- from Sarpanch of the village and
threatened to register the offence, in case his demand is not fulfilled.
The news item was published in the newspaper, indicting that vast
felling of trees is going on in the village Nanded. Consequently, on
17.3.2008, the Assistant Deputy Conservator of Forest, Jalgaon, has
conducted enquiry, as directed by the higher officer and carried out
spot panchnama as well as recorded the statements of Sarpanch
and other persons in the village. During the course of enquiry, it was
revealed that respondent No.1, Range Forest Officer, has filed false
complaint only for the reason that the Sarpanch of village Panchayat
has not fulfilled his demand. Learned counsel submits that in view of
the said enquiry, respondent No.1 came to be suspended by the
forest department. Respondent No.1-original complainant, having
fully aware that the departmental enquiry has been commenced
against him and he is likely to be suspended, hurriedly approached
the court and filed a private complaint against the present petitioner,
which is numbered as R.C.C. No. 60 of 2008. Learned counsel for
the petitioner submits that even respondent No.2-State has admitted
the said position in the affidavit in reply filed by the Assistant
Conservator of Forest (E.G.S.), Jalgaon Forest Division, Jalgaon.
Learned counsel submits that the continuation of said proceedings
crwp51.09
would be an abuse of court process.
4. None present for respondent No.1, though duly served.
5. Learned A.P.P. for respondent No.2 State submits that action
taken by respondent No.1 was not legal and valid. This fact was also
brought to the notice of learned J.M.F.C. through learned A.P.P. as
per the letter issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forest, Jalgaon
dated 10.4.2008. It was specifically brought to the notice of the
Magistrate that respondent No.1 had lodged the complaint before the
Court without prior permission from the office. Learned A.P.P.
submits that the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon
granted permission to Gram Panchayat, Nanded regarding felling of
3200 thorny trees/bushes standing in Gairan land of Gram
Panchayat, Nanded, vide letter dated 12.12.2006 and that
respondent No.1, on his own, without obtaining prior permission from
the office of Deputy Conservator of Forest, Jalgaon division, Jalgaon
has filed the complaint before the Magistrate. The learned A.P.P.
submits that departmental enquiry was initiated on account of said
misbehavior on the part of respondent No.1 and he was kept under
suspension as per the order passed by the Chief Conservator of
Forest. Even respondent No.1 had challenged the said suspension
order and action of initiation of departmental enquiry, by filing
crwp51.09
Original Application No. 139 of 2008, before the Maharashtra
Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Aurangabad. However, the said
original application also came to be dismissed in default.
6. Pravin Shivlal Patil, the Assistant Conservator of Forest
(E.G.S.) Jalgaon, Jalgaon Forest Division, has filed affidavit on
behalf of Forest department and para 13 of the said affidavit in reply
reads as under:-
"13. With reference to para No. 8 of the Writ Petition I say
that, the action taken by the then R.F.O. Mobile Squad was not
approved by his superior or controlling officers. Hence the
action taken by the Respondent no. 1 is not legal and valid and
this fact was brought to the notice of the learned J.M.F.C.
Amalner through the Government Pleader, Amalner as per
letter from Dy. Conservator of Forest, Jalgaon dated 10.4.2008.
Hereto annexed and marked as EXHIBIT-R-8 is the copy of the
said letter dated 10.4.2008. I say that, it was intimated that
Shri. E.S. Peerzada lodged the complaint before the learned
J.M.F.C. Amalner without prior permission from this office. The
Chief Executive Officer, Z.P. Jalgaon granted permission to the
Gram Panchayat, Nanded regarding felling of 3200 thorny
trees/bushes in respect of Nanded Gairan vide his letter dated
12.12.2006. It was intimated that Shri. E.S. Peerzada lodged
the complaint before the learned J.M.F.C. Amalner at his own
level without prior permission from office of the Deputy
Conservator of Forest, Jalgaon Division, Jalgaon who has
submitted the parawise reply (Point 1 to 15) to the Asst.
crwp51.09
Government Pleader, Amalner vide letter dated 15.1.2009.
Hereto annexed and marked as EXHIBIT-R-9."
7. Further, it is a part of record that respondent No. 1 Range
Forest Officer was subjected to departmental enquiry on account of
his misbehavior in terms of action taken, as detailed in the forgoing
paras, and even he was suspended by the Chief Conservator of
Forest, by order dated 28.03.2008. It is also a part of record that the
Assistant Conservator of Forest (Soil Conservation) of Jalgaon
division, has visited the spot and also recorded statements of
concerned persons, including Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat,
Nanded, on 17.03.2008 and it was revealed that no offence was
committed in respect of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 or any other
offence relating to forest. The Village Panchayat, Nanded by
publishing public notice, in daily news-paper, invited tenders for
removing the thorny bushes and herbs in the Gairan land belonging
to village Panchayat, Nanded. The said notice was published in the
newspaper after obtaining permission from the Chief Executive
Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. It appears that since the
departmental enquiry was initiated against respondent No. 1 and he
was suspended by the Chief Conservator of Forest in the course of
said departmental enquiry, respondent No. 1, Range Forest Officer,
at his own, without obtaining any permission from the forest
department, lodged a complaint against the petitioner. The petitioner
crwp51.09
was the highest bidder and since he has quoted highest bid, his
tender for cutting thorny bushes came to be accepted. Further the
petitioner has also deposited certain amount to the village Panchayat
and also commenced the work of cutting the said bushes. Thus, I do
not find that the petitioner has committed any offence as alleged in
the complaint. The continuation of said proceedings, now pending
before the Sessions Court, would be an abuse of court process.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:-
ORDER
I. Criminal writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause
"B-1".
II. Rule made absolute in the above terms.
III. Criminal writ petition is disposed of.
( V. K. JADHAV, J.)
rlj/
