Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision, Dismisses Appeals in Sandalwood Confiscation Case: Forest Department Directed to Adhere to Government Scheme


Summary of Judgement

Forest Offence, Sandalwood Confiscation, Kerala Forest Act, Government Scheme

1. Background:

  • The appeals arising from the High Court judgment dated 13.08.2010.
  • Writ petitions allowed by the High Court, setting aside the sandalwood confiscation order.
  • Appeals filed by the State of Kerala and its Divisional Forest Officer, Munnar, against the High Court decision.

2. Parties and Claims:

  • P.J. Antony and Cheriyan Kuruvila were petitioners in the writ petitions before the High Court.
  • Claims of ownership and possession over specific land parcels in Marayoor Village.
  • Applications made to Tahsildar for handing over dried and fallen sandalwood trees to Forest Department.

3. Inspection and Certificates:

  • Reports of Taluk Surveyor confirming fallen sandalwood trees.
  • Certificates issued by Village Officer for conducting auction of sandalwood trees.

4. Subsequent Events:

  • Joint application submitted to Divisional Forest Officer.
  • Seizure of sandalwood trees by Range Officer.
  • Confiscation orders passed and subsequent legal actions.

5. High Court Judgment:

  • Lack of evidence of forest offence.
  • Rejection of Forest Department's claims based on procedural irregularities.
  • Emphasis on documentation and actions of petitioners before authorities.

6. Analysis of Evidence:

  • Critique of Divisional Forest Officer's dismissal of Revenue officials' reports.
  • Questioning of enhanced figures of seized sandalwood trees.
  • Rejection of Forest Department's presumption of forest offence.

7. Legal Principles:

  • Interpretation of "reason to believe" under Forest Act.
  • Clarification of presumption under Section 69 of the Forest Act.
  • Requirements for formation of opinion by authorities.

8. Conclusion:

  • Upholding High Court decision to set aside confiscation order.
  • Directing Forest Department to proceed according to Government scheme.
  • Dismissal of appeals without costs.

9. Additional Remarks:

  • Mention of failure in maintaining records by Forest Department.
  • Reference to a previous judgment highlighting lapses in forest management.

10. Disposition:

  • Dismissal of appeals.
  • Direction for expeditious compliance with Government scheme.
  • No imposition of costs on parties.

11. Pending Applications:

  • Dismissal of any pending applications.

Case Title: Divisional Forest Officer, Munnar, Kerala, And Another vs P.J. Antony, Etc.

Citation: 2024 LawText (SC) (5) 141

Case Number: Civil Appeal Nos. 9751-9752 Of 2011

Advocate(s): Nishe Rajen Shonker, Gaurav Aggarwal, K.Parameshwar, Saiby Jose Kidangoor, Kanti, Chinmay Kalgaonkar, Raji Gururaj

Date of Decision: 2024-05-14