Thiruvananthapuram: The Kerala Forest Department has been told to register more than 300 cases in connection with the illegal felling of trees in the State.
The special investigation team (SIT) probing the tree-felling cases issued the directive after it found that no further action was made on several cases, which have been put in the cold storage after recording the mahazar. The mahazars would be registered as cases for further probe.
Authorities have so far registered 111 cases of trees felled after the controversial October 2020 order. The SIT would hold a meeting with the forest department officials to review the cases on Monday. Additional Director General of Police S Sreejith, who heads the SIT, would chair the meeting.
The SIT has found that trees were felled on forest and revenue land, besides pattaya (deeded) property. Trees were widely cut in nine districts.
The forest department has registered 31 cases against Roji Augustine, the owner of Soorya Timbers. He has also been slapped with four police cases. The 111 cases forest department had filed included the 31 against Augustine also.
The SIT has also found that the forest department had ‘settled’ several cases of tree felling without initiating legal action.
Further probe found more cases of trees felled before the 2020 controversial order, which were settled in connivance with certain forest officials. Only mahazars were recorded in the cases. Officials claimed that there was no evidence to prove that trees had been felled in those cases.
Police, too, could register FIRs in major incidents falling under the Forest Act. Police have decided to register cases of theft and corruption in the tree-felling incidents. The Crime Branch is probing the roles of those accused in the Muttil tree-felling case and revenue and forest department officials.
Tree registry missing in most districts
Thiruvananthapuram: Even two weeks after making a request, the SIT is yet to receive the tree registers of all districts from the revenue department.
The Land Revenue Commissioner had forwarded the SIT’s letter to district collectors. Officials have orally replied that the registers were not to be found in several districts. Incidentally, no district has provided a written reply.
In this backdrop, the SIT is mulling over issuing a summons to the Land Revenue Commissioner.
