THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2110 of 2011 ORDER: Heard the learned Government Pleader for Arbitration appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against order, dated 11.05.2011 passed by the learned III Additional District Judge (Vacation Judge), Warangal, in I.A.No.453 of 2011 in C.M.A.No.12 of 2011. On the allegation that the vehicle in question, which is a tractor, owned by the respondent was used for ploughing the forest land, it was seized and further, order of confiscation was passed. Against such order of confiscation, the respondent carried the matter by way of appeal before the Special Court for Forest Cases/Principal District Judge, Warangal, and pending appeal, he filed I.A.No.453 of 2011 for release of the vehicle in question. The Court below by way of interim order directed release of the vehicle in question subject to verification of R.C.Book on proper identification. In this Civil Revision Petition, it is contended by the learned Government Pleader for Arbitration appearing for the petitioner that as the vehicle in question was used illegally in the forest land, confiscation order was passed. In view of the same, the Court below ought not to have released the vehicle in question during pendency of the appeal. On the other hand, it is submitted by Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent that the vehicle in question was purchased by the respondent by obtaining financial assistance for the purpose of agriculture and it was engaged by one person, by name, Jalla Prabhakar and without knowing that the land belongs to the Forest Department, he used it for cultivation. In view of pendency of appeal before the appellate forum under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967, it is not desirable to record any finding on merits. Be that as it may, as it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the vehicle in question was used for agricultural purposes and still instalments are being paid by the respondent, I deem it appropriate to modify the order under challenge by directing the petitioner to release the vehicle in question to the respondent on his furnishing a bank guarantee for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) initially for a period of one year in favour of the Authorised Officer and to renew the same, till disposal of the appeal. The respondent shall also file further undertaking that he would produce the vehicle in question as and when required. Subject to the above, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 7h JULY, 2011. kvni