Inayat Ullah Versus Provincial Government through Chief Secretary Gilgit-Baltistan, Gilgit
Order
Johar Ali, J .--- The appellant/convict has filed the instant Criminal Appeal under Section 245(2) of Forest Act, 2019 read with Section 561-A, Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment/order dated 02-10-2025, passed by the respondent No.2/Secretary Forest G.B, whereby, the Secretary Forest G.B./Forest Appellate Authority by modifying the order dated 28-08-2025, passed by the Divisional Forest Officer/Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit, by imposing fine of Rs. 100,000/-on the vehicle in question and released the same on superdari subject to verification of treasury challan while upheld the remaining sentence passed by the Divisional Forest Officer/Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit.
2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 28-08-2025, the vehicle in question of the appellant/convict along with illegal timber was caught by the Raid Squad of Forest Check Post Parri Banglaw near Minawar while transportation of timber wood from Chilas, district Diamer to Gilgit city in Corolla OD Car bearing Registration No.NCP-DMR-01-776. Resultantly, case No.681/2025 was registered under Sections 120, 121, 227, 261 and 262 of the G.B. Forest Act, 2019 against the appellant/convict before the Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit. The Forest Magistrate started trial of the case and framed charge sheet against the appellant/convict. After completion of trial, the Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit, vide judgment/order dated 28-08-2025, sentenced appellant/convict for fifteen days' imprisonment with fine of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) and confiscated the vehicle in question along with the illegal timber in favour of the State. The appellant/convict was further sentenced to twenty days' imprisonment in case of default of payment of the fine amount. Being aggrieved, the appellant/convict challenged the same before the Secretary Forest through Forest Appeal No. 15/10/2025. The Secretary Forest vide judgment/order dated 02-10-2025, modified the judgment/order of the Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit and imposed fine of Rs.100,000/- (One Lac) on the vehicle in question and released the same on superdari subject to verification of the treasury challan. Being aggrieved, the appellant/convict has filed the instant Criminal Appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant/convict contended that initially the appellant/convict was booked in Forest Case No.681/25 under Sections 120 and 121 of the Forest Act, 2019. However, after submission of the charge sheet and during the course of proceedings, additional sections were inserted without affording the appellant/convict any opportunity to defend against the newly added charges, this act of the respondent No.3 (Divisional Forest Officer Gilgit/Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit) is contrary to law and violation of the golden principle of natural justice, i.e., no person should be condemned unheard. They further contended that the appellant/convict was convicted by the Divisional Forest Officer/Forest Magistrate 1st Class Gilgit vide impugned judgment/order dated 28-08-2025 without appreciating the facts and evidence, and without affording the appellant/convict a fair opportunity of hearing, hence, the impugned judgment/order is not maintainable and liable to be set aside. The learned counsel further contended that the Secretary Forest vide judgment/order dated 02-10-2025 erroneously dismissed the appeal and modified the impugned judgment/order passed by the Divisional Forest Officer/Forest Magistrate 1st Class Gilgit only to the extent of imposing Rs. 100,000/- fine for release of vehicle, and also upheld the conviction awarded against the appellant/convict in a hasty and arbitrary manner. They further argued that due to non-fixation/non-hearing of Appeal and suspension of sentence application before the Secretary Forest, the appellant/convict has already completed fifteen (15) days of rigorous imprisonment, and in compliance with the judgment/order passed by the Divisional Forest Officer Gilgit/Forest Magistrate 1st Class Gilgit, the appellant/convict has further undergone twenty (20) days imprisonment in lieu of non-payment of fine amount of Rs.50,000/-. The learned counsel further argued that both the impugned orders were passed without due process of law, without recording proper evidence, and without considering the factual position that the appellant/convict was not in possession of any illegal timber produced nor involved in any forest offence. The entire proceedings initiated on the report of a subordinate forest staff are mala fide, hasty, and violation of the fundamental rights of the appellant/convict. They further submitted that the appellant/convict has availed all available forums to redress his grievances, but the respondents are reluctant to set aside the impugned orders passed by respondents Nos.2 and 3. They further argued that the appellant/convict has suffered severe financial loss in the trial and if his vehicle remains under custody, it will cause natural decay, and the appellant/convict is unable to pay the heavy fine of Rs. 100,000/- (one lac) imposed arbitrarily for release of vehicle in question. To strengthen their arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant/convict has referred the following case laws:-
1. Criminal Appeal No.27/2024 (G.B. Chief Court)
2. Criminal Appeal No.44/2024 (G.B. Chief Court]
The learned counsel for the appellant/convict have lastly prayed as under:-
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: a) Set aside the impugned order/judgment dated 28-08-2025, passed by the Divisional Forest Officer/Forest Magistrate 1st Class, Gilgit, and the order dated 02-10-2025, passed by the Secretary Forest, Gilgit-Baltistan, being illegal, void and without jurisdiction; b) Acquit the appellant from all charges leveled under the Gilgit-Baltistan Forest Act, 2019; c) Direct the respondents to release the vehicle bearing Registration No.DMR-776, G Corolla car in favour of the appellant without any fine or penalty, to prevent further loss and decay;
(d) Pass any other order deemed just and proper in the interest of justice.
4. Conversely, the learned Legal Advisor for the respondents have vehemently opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant/convict and contended that the appellant/convict was caught red-handed on the spot by the Forest Guard/Raid Squad Parri Banglaw at Minawar Gilgit while transportation of timber wood from District Diamer to District Gilgit in his G-Corolla vehicle bearing Registration No.NCP-DMR-01-776, hence, the learned Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit has rightly sentenced the appellant/convict for fifteen days rigorious imprisonment with fine of Rs.50,000/- and confiscated the vehicle in question along with the illegal timber in favour of the State. The learned Legal Advisor has further argued that the Secretary Forest vide order dated 02-10-2025 has modified the order of the Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit on pity basis and imposed fine of Rs.100,000/- and released his vehicle in question on superdari subject to verification of the treasury challan. He lastly prayed for dismissal of the instant Criminal Appeal.
5. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the available record of the case with their able assistance.
6. From perusal of record it reveals that the appellant/convict was apprehended by the staff of Forest Department G.B. on 28.08.2025 while transportation of illegal timber from Chilas, district Diamer to district Gilgit in his G-Corolla vehicle No.NCP-DMR-01-776. The case against the appellant/convict was registered under Sections 120 and 121 of the Forest Act, 2019, and later on, after submission of the charge sheet and during the course of proceedings, additional Sections 227, 261 and 262 of the G.B. Forest Act, 2019 were added against the appellant/convict and he was brought before the Forest Magistrate Gilgit on 28-08-2025. Record further reveals that the learned Trial Court/Forest Magistrate has not framed charge against the appellant/ convict in accordance with the laid down procedure and law and has violated the mandatory provisions of Section 241-A(2), Cr.P.C. Under the aforesaid provisions of law, it is mandatory before framing of charge that the Trial Court/Forest Magistrate was legally bound to supply copies of complaint along with the annexures, name of witnesses and the gist of evidence, which is likely to adduce at the trial of the accused free of cost, not less than seven days before commencement of trial/framing of the charge. The learned Trial Court/Forest Magistrate has violated the ibid provision of law and trial will be vitiated when the basic mandatory provision of law is not complied. In the instant case, the appellant/convict was convicted on the basis of his confession. It is settled principle of law that plea of guilt should be recorded in question and answer from and in the exact words of accused in order to find out what the accused exactly meant by pleading guilty and in absence of that the Court cannot convict him on the basis of such plea. In the instant case, the Trial Court/Forest Magistrate has failed to do so. Moreover, it is settled law that when the accused person has confessed the offence then Court is bound to give sufficient time as well as show cause notice to the appellant/accused as to why he should not be convicted on the plea of guilty as required under Section 243, Cr.P.C. The Section 243, Cr.P.C is mandatory in nature and its violation is tantamount to illegality which is not curable under Section 537, Cr.P.C, hence, the impugned conviction is not sustainable. On appeal, the appellate authority passed order on 02-10-2025, which is also not maintainable as he has simply upheld the above judgment/order of the learned Trial Court/Forest Magistrate and dismissed the appeal of appellant/convict without giving reasons of maintaining of the order of Forest Magistrate which is gross violation of provisions of Section 367, Cr.P.C.
7. In view of the above discussion, I am of the considered view that the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant/convict to the extent of imprisonment and confiscation of his vehicle in question are the result of misapplication of law, violation of due process, and non-observance of fair trial. Consequently, the impugned order dated 02-10-2025, passed by the Secretary Forest/Appellate Forum as well as the order dated 28-08-2025, passed by the Forest Magistrate First Class Gilgit to the extent of imprisonment and confiscation of vehicle are not tenable in the eyes of law and are hereby set aside. Resultantly, the appellant/convict is acquitted from the charges levelled against him under Sections 120, 121, 227, 261 and 262 of the G.B. Forest Act, 2019 and direct the respondents to release the vehicle of the appellant/convict.
8. The above are the detailed reasons of my short order passed earlier as under:-
"For the detailed reasons to be recorded later on, the instant Criminal Appeal under Section 245(2) of the Forest Act, 2019 read with Section 561-A, Cr.P.C is hereby allowed as prayed for and the answering respondents are directed to release the vehicle G-Corolla Car bearing Registration No.DMR-776 in favour of the appellant forthwith. File."
JK/9/GB Appeal allowed.