Delhi High Court held individual in contempt for using forged document to cut tree. The court’s decision reflects strict adherence to environmental laws. The case highlights the consequences of fraudulent actions in environmental matters. This ruling highlights the importance of legal compliance in tree removal procedures.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court found an individual in contempt for acquiring a forged document in order to cut down a tree. A man filed a plea with the court seeking a directive to address his complaint regarding tree felling in a New Delhi colony.
A Single Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad, remarked,
“The purpose of the contempt jurisdiction is to maintain the dignity and authority of the courts of law because the respect and authority held by these courts are the primary assurances for an average citizen, and the democratic structure of society would be jeopardized if judicial respect is undermined. Given the actions of Respondent No.2/Contemnor, leniency is not warranted from this Court. It is imperative to send a resolute message to society that court orders must be obeyed.”
Read Also: Delhi High Court Judges Seek Transfers
The petitioner represented by Advocate Aditya N. Prasad, while ASC Anupam Srivastava appeared for the respondent.
In reviewing the case at hand, the High Court observed,
“Upon examination of the counter affidavit submitted by the Deputy Conservator of Forest and the Status Report filed by the Delhi Police, it is evident that Respondent No.2 has produced a falsified permission letter for tree felling. Consequently, the tree at Lajpat Nagar was cut based on this forged permission.”
The Court noted that the facts unequivocally demonstrate that the contemnor acquired permission to cut the tree despite the court’s order, and the forest department alleges that this permission is based on a forged document.
The Court Concluded that,
“This Court concludes that Respondent No.2 has willfully disobeyed the Orders of this Court,”
Therefore, the Court found the contemner guilty and scheduled a hearing on April 30 to determine the punishment to be imposed on them for the offenses under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Read Also: Delhi High Court Upholds Tribunal Decisions: Affirms High Courts’ Writ Jurisdiction
The petitioner represented by Advocate Aditya N. Prasad.
The respondents included ASC Anupam Srivastava, Advocate Dhairya Gupta, Vasuh Misra, DCG Vipul Pandey, Advocates Parveen Rawal and Shashank Sachdeva, ASC Mehak Nakra, and Advocates Aditi Kapoor and Abhishek Khari.
A writ petition scheduled for July 7, 2021, during which the High Court directed the Tree Officer and the Deputy Conservator of Forest to ensure no harm came to the trees at two specified locations. However, it clarified that if the tree at Defence Colony already been felled, the order wouldn’t apply. Conversely, the order enforced for the tree at Lajpat Nagar. Upon realizing that the tree at Lajpat Nagar being cut, the petitioner filed a contempt case, leading to a police complaint and subsequent apprehension of individuals and seizure of equipment by the local police. The forest authorities admitted to seeking permission to fell the tree at Lajpat Nagar based on forged documents. The petitioner’s oral request to include the contemnor as a respondent in the contempt petition granted, and notice issued accordingly.
Read Judgement: [Bhavreen Kandhari v. Mandeep Mittal]