By: Mohd Amin Mir
Once upon a time, the landscapes of Jammu and Kashmir were defined by the graceful sway of chinar leaves in the breeze and the majestic silhouette of walnut trees standing tall on hillsides and village borders. These trees were more than flora; they were symbols of culture, commerce, and continuity. Today, however, they face an existential threat, not from natural calamities or pests, but from human avarice, administrative confusion, and legal loopholes.
The question at the heart of the crisis is deceptively simple: Who has the authority to permit the cutting of walnut and chinar trees in Jammu & Kashmir? Can a Divisional Forest Officer (DFO) legally prevent a Tehsildar from granting such permission? Or is this power misplaced in a bureaucratic tangle?
This article explores the intricate interplay of law, history, current misuse, and the environmental consequences of inaction, while also offering a roadmap for safeguarding these ecological and cultural treasures.
The Legal Terrain: Section 133 CrPC and Its Applicability
Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 empowers Executive Magistrates, such as Tehsildars, to issue conditional orders for the removal of public nuisances. These could range from obstructed pathways to dangerously hanging structures, and in some disputed interpretations, even trees.
However, legal scholars and judgments have made it increasingly clear that Section 133 cannot override special statutes where such statutes exist to deal with a specific subject matter — such as environmental conservation and forestry.
In this light, it becomes evident that Section 133 CrPC is not legally tenable as a tool to grant permission for felling specified trees like walnut and chinar, which are governed under a special law in Jammu and Kashmir.
The Preservation Law: J&K Preservation of Specified Trees Act, 1969
Enacted with foresight, the Jammu and Kashmir Preservation of Specified Trees Act, 1969 is the cornerstone legislation that regulates the felling of walnut and chinar trees. The law was framed to prevent indiscriminate cutting and ensure these heritage trees are preserved for posterity.
Key provisions include:
Section 2(d): Defines “specified trees,” which currently include walnut and chinar.
Section 3: Prohibits cutting down, uprooting, or damaging such trees without written permission.
Section 5: Empowers the Deputy Commissioner (DC) as the competent authority to grant or deny such permission, after obtaining a technical opinion from the Divisional Forest Officer.
Hence, the law is unambiguous — only the Deputy Commissioner, after due consultation with the DFO, can permit the felling of walnut and chinar trees.
Role of the Divisional Forest Officer: Advisory, Not Directive
The DFO is a technical expert, not a licensing authority. Their role is to assess whether the tree in question is diseased, hazardous, or impeding essential infrastructure, and then submit a report to the Deputy Commissioner.
In a recent incident from Anantnag, a DFO issued a letter directing a Tehsildar not to entertain applications under Section 133 CrPC for the cutting of walnut trees. While this direction aligns with legal principles, it lacks binding authority. The DFO can advise, but not command a magistrate unless empowered by law or a court.
This subtle legal nuance is frequently misunderstood, resulting in friction and jurisdictional overreach.
The Historical Context: Royal Edicts and Cultural Significance
The chinar tree (Platanus orientalis) is perhaps the most iconic symbol of Kashmiri heritage. The Mughal emperor Jahangir was so enchanted by its beauty that he ordered the planting of chinar avenues across Srinagar. Later, Maharaja Hari Singh prohibited their felling in 1922, recognizing their symbolic and environmental value.
The walnut tree, prized for its high-quality timber and nutrient-rich nuts, was similarly protected, given its economic value to Kashmiri households. Craftsmen used its wood for carving, furniture, and houseboats — a tradition passed down through generations.
These royal and cultural protections laid the groundwork for the 1969 Act, which formalized the protection.
Post-2019 Developments: Repeals and Retentions
After the abrogation of Article 370 and the bifurcation of the state into two Union Territories, many state laws were repealed. However, the Preservation of Specified Trees Act, 1969 continues to operate in the UT of J&K, reaffirming its continued relevance.
Recent correspondence from the Office of the Deputy Commissioner Anantnag (Ref: DCA/Misc/2023-24/595-7617 dated 11.03.2024) reiterates that no Executive Magistrate is permitted to allow felling under Section 133 CrPC for walnut or chinar trees, reinforcing that the DC is the sole authority under the special law.
Ground Reality: Widespread Violations and Local Complicity
Despite robust legal protections, specified trees are being felled at an alarming rate. Locals, often in connivance with contractors and certain officials, exploit ignorance, delays in permissions, or lack of coordination between departments.
Illegal felling is disguised as:
Road expansion projects
Hazards to electric lines
Crop interference
There are instances where trees are chopped at night, their stumps buried or burnt, and permissions backdated fraudulently. In rural hamlets, social influence often outweighs legal process.
Moreover, enforcement is weak. FIRs are rarely lodged. Penalties are lenient. And follow-up inspections by forest staff are infrequent.
Is the End Near? A Grim Forecast
If this trajectory continues unchecked, the once-proud walnut and chinar trees may soon be found only in textbooks and paintings. Their saplings are not being replanted with the urgency required. Their ecological role in preventing soil erosion and maintaining microclimates is underestimated.
The question must now be asked with sincerity: Are we writing the obituary of these trees through legal neglect and moral apathy?
The Way Forward: Suggestions for Revival and Reform
To reverse this ecological and cultural decay, the government and civil society must act on multiple fronts:
- Legislative Strengthening:
Amend the 1969 Act to include stricter penalties, real-time tracking of permissions, and mandatory replanting clauses.
Establish tree heritage zones where felling is entirely banned, akin to “no-construction” zones.
- Digital Permission and Monitoring System:
Introduce an online portal for tree felling applications, linked to GIS maps and DFO reports.
Mandate photographic and video documentation of trees before any decision is taken.
- Empower the Forest Department Technically, Not Administratively:
Allow DFOs to recommend cancellation of illegal permissions.
Include forest officers in revenue inspections when land records involve walnut or chinar trees.
- Awareness and Community Engagement:
Launch village-level Tree Guardianship Programs, involving schools and panchayats.
Offer incentives for preserving old walnut and chinar trees on private land.
- Enforcement Mechanisms:
Create a Tree Protection Task Force within the Forest Department with magisterial powers under the Forest Act.
Fast-track prosecutions for illegal felling under environmental courts or Lok Adalats.
- Celebrate Tree Heritage:
Organize annual Walnut and Chinar Festivals, tying together culture, ecology, and commerce.
Document and publish the oldest walnut and chinar trees, tagging them as “State Trees of Historical Significance.”
Conclusion: The Battle Is Legal, But the Cause Is Moral
The issue of who can allow or prevent the cutting of a walnut or chinar tree is not just a legal question — it is a test of our commitment to ecological justice and cultural preservation. While the law clearly empowers the Deputy Commissioner and not the Tehsildar or DFO independently, the current abuse of authority and negligence threaten to turn a living legacy into mere memory.
The Divisional Forest Officer has a duty to advise, not command. The Tehsildar must defer to the special legislation. The Deputy Commissioner must act with integrity. But above all, the citizens must recognize that once a chinar is gone, it cannot be replaced in our lifetime.
Unless we act now — not tomorrow — we may find ourselves staring at valleys without shadows, hilltops without crowns, and a culture stripped of its most iconic .
