Previous Year Question

Statement 1 is incorrect. The Indian Forest (Amendment) Act, 2017 amended Section 2(7) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and excluded bamboo from the definition of a “tree”. However, this relaxation principally applies to bamboo grown in non-forest areas.

The amendment was intended to relieve farmers growing bamboo on non-forest land from requirements relating to felling and transit permissions. Bamboo naturally growing in a forest area is treated differently. The amendment did not give forest dwellers a general and unrestricted right to fell bamboo growing in forest areas. Therefore, Statement 1 is incorrect.

Statement 2 is correct. Section 2(i) of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 expressly includes bamboo within the definition of “minor forest produce”. In addition to bamboo, the definition includes brushwood, stumps, cane, tussar cocoons, honey, wax, lac, tendu or kendu leaves, medicinal plants, herbs, roots and tubers and other non-timber forest produce.

Statement 3 is correct. Section 3(1)(c) of the Forest Rights Act gives eligible forest-dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers the right of:

• Ownership,

• Access,

• Collection,

• Use, and

• Disposal

of minor forest produce that has traditionally been collected.

The right may extend to minor forest produce traditionally collected within or outside village boundaries. Eligible forest-right holders may consequently collect, use or sell minor forest produce such as bamboo, subject to the Forest Rights Act and applicable conservation requirements.

The distinction between the two laws is important: the 2017 amendment to the Indian Forest Act facilitates the cultivation, felling and transportation of bamboo grown on non-forest land, whereas the Forest Rights Act recognises livelihood and community rights of eligible forest communities over minor forest produce.