Two get jail for illegal timber transport in Mayurbhanj
Ajay Dandapat (30) and Dayanidhi Behera (45), both from Sendhakacha village under Kaptipada police limits, were also fined `1,000 by the Udala SDJM court.
The duo was arrested on December 2, 2016, while transporting timber on a motorcycle, in violation of the Orissa Timber and Other Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1980.
Delivering the verdict, SDJM Anurag Dehury observed that the measure of punishment in a case of offence against environment and ecology must depend upon the nature, manner and time of conduct of the offenders and gravity of the offence alleged against them. 'Protection of ecological balance can be achieved only by imposing appropriate sentence prescribed,' the order stated.
Forest authorities said, invoking this principle, the court has established that the severity and context of the offence, particularly the illicit timber transportation, will warrant such sentences.
Illegal timber transportation has long threatened forest ecosystems in Mayurbhanj and other parts of the state. The verdict will send a clear message against such offence and uphold ecological integrity, they added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
a day ago
- New Indian Express
Two get jail for illegal timber transport in Mayurbhanj
BHUBANESWAR/BARIPADA: A Mayurbhanj court has sentenced two persons to three year imprisonment for illegal transport of forest timber in Mayurbhanj district in what is seen as an important judgement. Ajay Dandapat (30) and Dayanidhi Behera (45), both from Sendhakacha village under Kaptipada police limits, were also fined `1,000 by the Udala SDJM court. The duo was arrested on December 2, 2016, while transporting timber on a motorcycle, in violation of the Orissa Timber and Other Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1980. Delivering the verdict, SDJM Anurag Dehury observed that the measure of punishment in a case of offence against environment and ecology must depend upon the nature, manner and time of conduct of the offenders and gravity of the offence alleged against them. 'Protection of ecological balance can be achieved only by imposing appropriate sentence prescribed,' the order stated. Forest authorities said, invoking this principle, the court has established that the severity and context of the offence, particularly the illicit timber transportation, will warrant such sentences. Illegal timber transportation has long threatened forest ecosystems in Mayurbhanj and other parts of the state. The verdict will send a clear message against such offence and uphold ecological integrity, they added.
New Indian Express
4 days ago
- New Indian Express
Orissa High Court refuses to quash criminal proceedings against widow of ACF Soumya Ranjan
CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has refused to quash the criminal proceedings against Bidyabharati Panda, widow of assistant conservator of forests (ACF) Soumya Ranjan Mohapatra, in connection with his mysterious death in July 2021. A single judge bench of Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra disposed of Panda's petition challenging the April 19, 2023 order of the SDJM, Paralakhemundi, which had taken cognisance of a murder complaint naming her and two others as accused. Soumya Ranjan Mohapatra had suffered 90 per cent burn injuries on the night of July 11, 2021, in his official quarters at Paralakhemundi. He succumbed to his injuries two days later, on July 13, at a private hospital in Cuttack. His father Abhiram Mohapatra, subsequently lodged a complaint accusing Bidyabharati, the family cook Manmath Kumbha, and the then DFO Sangram Kesari Behera of murder. Although a Crime Branch investigation gave a clean chit to the accused, the SDJM court took cognisance of the murder complaint in April 2023 and summoned all three. Challenging the summons, Bidyabharati approached the high court under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of the proceedings. However, Justice Mishra observed that the case was at a preliminary stage and involved contested facts, which made it appropriate for trial rather than early judicial intervention. 'The inherent power under Section 482 CrPC should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances. The competing versions presented by both parties and the existence of disputed questions of fact make this an inappropriate case for quashing at this stage,' the judgment read. Justice Mishra clarified that refusal to quash the case did not prevent the petitioner from seeking discharge during the trial. 'It is well settled that at the stage of issuing process, the magistrate is mainly concerned with the allegations made in the complaint or the evidence led in support of the same,' he said.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Time of India
HC quashes plea of wife against criminal trial in forest officer death case
Cuttack: Orissa high court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against Bidyabharati Panda in the 2021 death case of her husband and then assistant conservator of forests (ACF) Soumya Ranjan Mohapatra. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra, in his judgment on July 3, disposed of Panda's plea challenging the April 19, 2023, order of the SDJM court in Gajapati district's Paralakhemundi, which had taken cognisance of a murder complaint filed by Mohapatra's father and summoned Panda along with two others — family cook Manmath Kumbha and then divisional forest officer (DFO) Sangram Kesari Behera. Mohapatra had sustained 90% burn injuries under mysterious circumstances at his govt quarters in Paralakhemundi on the night of July 11, 2021, and died two days later while undergoing treatment in Cuttack. His father, Abhiram Mohapatra, had alleged foul play and accused the three of murder. Though the crime branch gave a clean chit to all accused, the SDJM court had reopened the case based on a protest petition and additional evidence submitted by the complainant. Panda moved the HC under Section 482 of CrPC seeking quashing of the proceedings. However, the HC said the case involved "competing versions" and "disputed questions of fact" that should be tested during trial. "This court is conscious of the fact that the proceedings are at a nascent stage," Justice Mishra said, adding, "Detailed appreciation of evidence and consideration of the petitioner's defence can only take place during trial. Hence, this court is reluctant to intervene at this stage." The HC clarified that the petitioner is free to approach the trial court with a discharge petition. "If such an application is filed, the trial court shall consider all grounds raised in this petition without being influenced by this court's observations," the order said. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Justice Mishra also held that the trial court's order could not be faulted simply because it lacked detailed reasoning. "At the stage of issuing process, the magistrate is mainly concerned with allegations made in the complaint and supporting evidence," he observed. The case will now proceed to trial, where the accused will have the opportunity to present their defence.
