1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.645/2008 Ashok Tukaram Gulve ...Versus... State of Maharashtra through Authorized Officer, Assistant Conservator of Forest Buldhana -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri Apurv De, Adv. for petitioner] CORAM:- A.H. JOSHI AND A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATED :- 12.01.2009 1. The petitioner is challenging the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, confirming the order of the competent authority passed under the Forest Act. 2. The petitioner's teak-wood material is confiscated to the State under Section 61-A of the said Act. 3. The question which poses to the root of the case is that the property subject matter did not bear hammer mark which is necessary in law for identifying the property with any mark for which transport permit has been issued by the competent authority. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner did not possess the transport permit as well as identification mark on the wood. 2 5. The question of matching of the hammer mark with the mark impressed on the transit pass/permit did not arise. On this sole ground the impugned orders which are concurrent do not call for interference. 6. Petition has no merits and is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE ssw