Kerala High Court orders trial for Augustine brothers in timber fraud case

The Kerala High Court has cleared the way for the trial of the Augustine brothers in a cheating case linked to the controversial Muttil tree-felling scandal, rejecting their attempt to delay proceedings before the Chottanikkara court.

Justice C.S. Dias directed the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court in Chottanikkara to begin the trial from September 22 and dispose of the matter within six months. The ruling came after the court dismissed a petition filed by the brothers seeking a stay on the Chottanikkara proceedings until a final report was submitted in a related case before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Sulthan Batery, Wayanad.

Two parallel cases against the brothers

The Augustine brothers are facing prosecution on two fronts. The Forest Department has registered a case against them before the Sulthan Bathery court for the illegal felling of rosewood trees in Muttil South Village.

Separately, another case was filed at Chottanikkara based on a complaint by M.M. Aliyar, proprietor of Malabar Timber Industries. Aliyar alleged that the brothers defrauded him by offering to sell timber worth ₹1.4 crore with all requisite permissions.

The Director General of Prosecution (DGP), T.A. Asaf Ali, informed the court that the investigation in the Sulthan Bathery case had been concluded. Following this, the court lifted an earlier interim stay and directed the investigating officer to file the final report.

Accused claimed 'serious prejudice'

Roji Augustine, along with his brothers Josekutty Augustine and Anto Augustine, argued that proceeding with the Chottanikkara cheating case before the final report was filed in Sulthan Bathery would cause them "serious prejudice". They contended that the two cases were intertwined.

The brothers also claimed that the timber was not forest produce, and therefore the Forest Department's seizure of it was not legally tenable.

Prosecution highlights accused's criminal record

The DGP and Aliyar countered that the brothers were attempting to prolong the proceedings unnecessarily. The prosecution pointed out that Roji Augustine was a "history-sheeter" accused in 37 similar cases.

They argued that since the two alleged crimes were registered for distinct sets of offences by two different police stations and were pending before two different courts, the proceedings could progress independently.

Court rules offences are distinct

Justice Dias held that the provision to avoid parallel proceedings for the same offences under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) could not be applied in this case. The court observed that even if the transactions concerning the timber formed the factual background of both proceedings, it would not make the offences the same.

The judgment represents a significant setback for the Augustine brothers, who now face simultaneous prosecution in two courts without the protection they had sought through procedural delays.

Source: The Hindu