Exhaustive definition of forest produce excludes processed Rosa Oil, so no transit permit is required.

Rosa Oil extracted from Rousa grass was held not to fall within "forest produce" under the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, because Section 2(g), though inclusive in form, was read as an exhaustive definition covering only the specified forest articles and related prescribed produce. The finished oil had undergone chemical processing after extraction and was not one of the enumerated categories. As it was not forest produce, the transit permit requirement under the Andhra Pradesh Forest Produce Transit Rules did not apply.

---

---

Issues: Whether Rosa Oil extracted from Rousa grass is "forest produce" within Section 2(g) of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967, and whether its transit required a permit under the Andhra Pradesh Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1970.

Analysis: Section 2(g) defined "forest produce" by an inclusive formulation, but the structure of the provision showed that it covered specified forest articles, items found in or brought from a forest, and such other produce as may be prescribed. Rosa Oil was not one of the enumerated articles in the relevant category, and the finished product had undergone chemical processing after extraction from Rousa grass. In this context, the inclusive wording was treated as operating in the sense of "means and includes", so that the definition was exhaustive rather than open-ended in its application to the disputed consignment. Since the goods were not forest produce, the permit requirement under the Transit Rules was not attracted.

Conclusion: Rosa Oil was not forest produce for the purpose of the Act and the Rules, and no forest-department permit was required for its transit.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory definition, though framed with the word "includes", is structured as an exhaustive enumeration and the finished article is not covered by the specified categories, the definition cannot be extended to require a transit permit for that article.

---