^ ^ HISH COURT OF CrtHATTSSSAWi AT BILASPUK (SB: Hon'bS®Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) Writ Petition No.484 ef 2001 Laia aiics Uma Ksnt Shrivcstava V'3. The State of Chhattisgarh ond others POST FQR PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE ORDER ON 30/11/2011 Sdf- T. P. Sharma Judge --/ HZffl-i COURT OF CHHATTSSSARH AT BILASFUR Wrst Petition No.484 of 2001 Petittenep Laia aiias Uma Kant Shriv-asluva Aged about 42 years, S/o Late Shri Ayodhya Prosad Shr'ivostaya At pr-esent jobiess, Resident of &igujai CoHege Road, RsjrKmdgasn Chhattissiarh. Resoondents 1. 2. versus The State of Chhattisgarh, TTirough : Secretar-y, Forest &epartme"t. D.K.5ec,"et<B'!a+, ESaipu", Chhatt'!sga"h. The Appeiioite Authority Cum- Conseryator of Fsrest Durg Circk, Durg. 3. Sub-&ivislonai Officer Forest (SeRera!), Au-Hiorised -Authority, Khaira9arh, District -Rajnaidgaon, Chhatti39ar-h. (Writ Petition under Articie 226/227 of the Constitution of India) Mr.P.K.C.Tiiiv-ari, Senior Advocate with iVir.Shashi Bhushcn, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Sushi! ISubey, government Advocate for the respondents/State. (SB: Hon'bie Mr. T.P. Shanna. J.) OR5ER (Passed on 30T" Novewber, 2011) 1. By 1+iis petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has chollenged the iegaiity and propriety of tiie order dated 28.2.2001 passed by -i+ie Fifth Additionai Sessions Judge. Durg, in Criminai Revision Nio.258/2000, affirming the ordar dated 30.8.2000 passed by lar,e Appeiiate Au-ti-iority ond Conservstor of Forest, Durg and the order dated 22.3.2000 passed-by the authori2ed authori-ty/Sub Divisionai Officer -^ (Forest), Khairagarh under Forest Act,whereby the authorized auti-iorit// Sub bivisionai Officer has passed the order of confiscation of vehicie Tuta 407 No.A'i.P.26 B-0535 on the ground that the petitioner- wcs not haying tronsit pass/valid permit for trcnsportaTion of wood. 2. The short question of iaw invpived in the present case is whether the vehicie, toois, boats, ropes, chains and other arficies ussd for tiRnber or forest produce which 'm either case is not the property of the &overnmerit cnci in respect of which the fore.si offence has been committed, can be confiscated without conviction of the offender 'm •terms of Section 55 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (for short 'the Act, 1927). 3. As per nutsheii case, trees are standing in government kotMcsri iand owned and possessed by kotwar. The petitioner was tronsporting/carr/ing the same. At •Ae time of tronsportation the petitioner was not having ony transit pass or vaiid permit for tronsportntion of such forest produce. Forest produce aiong with vehicie via.re. seized. After intimation under Section 52 (4) of -the Act, 1927 the authorized authority and Sub Divisionai Officer, Khairagarh initiated confisaation proceeding and after providing opportunity of hearing to tiie parttes, order uf confisention r^iatirig to vehicie belonging to me petitioner has been passed. 5ame mas challenged before the appeliate authority cmd Conservator of Forest, &urg ond oppelicte aul+iority has affirmed the order passed by the cuthocized authority. Again it wns chaiienged before the Fifth Additionai Sessions judge, burg in CriminaS Rev'ision No.258/2000 wid by the order impugned the r'evisionai Court has aiso affir-med the orders. 4. I haye heard Jearned counsel for the parties. perused the order impugned, orders of the au'ttiorized authority and oppeiiate authority ond copies of other documents fiied on behaif of the petitioner. 5. Learned counsei for the petitioner •v'ehementiy argued that important question of iaw iriv&ive in the present case for considerotion is whether in coise of timber or forest produce not beiongmg to the ©overnmentany I'illil 'tf^ ^ -l... 'V-SS '2S suoi+s'as j." suo!S!ACMd 04. 4,3sf'qns ipus 'asua^o^ -4.sajoj. Auo 6u!4.j.!UiiUQ3 ui pasn asoa LJOOS ui 'aj3i4..!0 J3LJ4.0 AUB .10 SU!Olj3 'Bsdo.! 'Ea|3St!aA 'S^OOq 'SJ004. jp pUO 'paUllUSMOO USSq SDlj 83U3J.J.Q +ESdOj. D usiqw. j.o ^adsa-i u! puo 4.uauii.ysA05 31^. yO X+^ado^d stj4. ^.QU EI sstx? jai^ia ui y3ii|M asnpo-id +ss>i0y >)o uaqu'4 jjy (t) -•uo!+s»E!j.uo3 "4. ajqoii uaijis ''34.3 'S|004. 'aonpoje! 453.10^ -gG^ -;japun sc spisaj Liaiijw. papuaiuo uaaq osi" ssq ^gfi^ 4ay a4+ J.o sfi uoi+ssg •sggi j.o sg-o!\j ^sy +usu!pusuiy •^•vy Aq ^g6T '•f-:5V 8M+ j-° 25 US!4.3Sg U! SpOlU U33q S"q ES|3!4..iD ^SLj+Q pUD SUIDLJO 'Sado^ 'S4.""q 'SJOQ4. '3|3!Lj8A ^O UQ!+B3EiyU03 04. 6u!4.Dj3J UOIE!AQ^d jD!53dS •^ •DlpU^yO uo!4.n+!4.suo3 ss+t y" ^.Zg ajos+.'y jspun uoi+sipsunr X>iOE!.Ajadns j.o sspjaxa U! BauajSy.ia+u! 6uj4.uo>!.!DA«. Aj.H®6s!]! Auo paK.jsuuios +ou SAO!^ /4!>i0i4j.ni* puoisiAs.! puo Aj.i.iOtjj.ns a+(i||sddo 314;. uoi+ossij.uoo 3.0 jap^o 8Lj4. 6u!iu^!,.j.o PUD a|3!tj3A Sti+ 6u4n3S!yUQ3 Xq pUD ^ggT '4.3y 8L14. io 25 uoi+sss uapun UOIj.OOEIyUOS JO^. SiqOI! SOM a|3!49A 'sssuo+EUinwp assiy. ui '+iiUjad PIJOA -i0 SEfd j.jSUP.ij. /.UD 4.nOtj4.!M asgiqaA siu Xq aonpQ^d ^.sa.'OA 314}. Sujuodsusuj. SBM ^auo!+j4.ad +uasajd siji 4.0U4. psnSuo pus uos4.i4.sd atj4. pssoddo 4.uspuodsa</a4.04.S 31^- Mj' aj.osoApy +u3U!u^9Aog p9uj"aj 'pucij jai}j.o 3t{4. uo '9 "Z26T '+:?V 34^ 4° SS uoi-f.sss 4i-!"> asuBp-iosso u! /+MOtj4.no pszuQi.i4.no ^Oy ajqissod /.!;o6a| +ou SOM aonpo^d+sa^oj. wns ^o UOI+ICTEI^UQS 'a.jQyS^isttj. 'ps^siAuog uasq sot{ .iapua^.j.o 4.D!4j. moijs 04. 4.u3iun30p Auo pasnpojd +ou SOM af.n^.g aijj. ssiMjai+j.Q usAg -pauinboo uaaq soij .ispuSyyO aij^. 'asoo +u8sa^d Silj. ui 4.0LJ4. panS.'c osp |asuno5 paujoy] "Z?6I '•i.sy 3i4<. j.o gg uoi+oac ly.im aouDp-iosao ui uou onti auis si jspua^o SIJ+ 40 UOI+SJAUOS +uauiu.i8A03 aj.oj.s 3S4J. o^. 6us6uo|8q J.QU ssnpo-id ^.s&ioj. puo ^aqiu!4. o+ SUI+DJS^ UOS+BSSIJ.UOS j.o ai3p.iO S'4). SSS6 Qi J9p.iQ ui wv^. panfijD usiu.jny jasunoo pauaos-] •paj.iogiyUoa ®q UESO Sa|3!J...in -l»lj4.0 pUO suiotjs 'sadoj 's+ooq 'S!004. 'ajsiLjsA 'japuayyO 3t}j. j.Q U014.WAU03 4.n"i.i4.!M .iSUj.Sljm U314). p34-i.!U!Ui03 Sj SOUaj.yO +Ea.!Oj. -8- PE3E ^ 1 .=?"» 52-B and 52-C, be iiubie to confiscation upon conviction of the offendsr for such forest-offence. (2) Such confiscation may be in addition to any otiier punishment prescribeci for such offence." 8. As per Section 52 of the Act, 1927, generai procedure has been pr«scribed for confiscation of vehicie, too!s, boats, cnd o-rtier arrieles used in commiasion of forest offence, but speciai provision reiating to confiscation of vehicie ond other articies used in commission of forest offence in which timber or forest produce sre not property of the State ©ovei'nmenthas been made in Section 55 of the Act, 1927. 9. Section 55 of 1+ie Act, 1927 is exception to generoi ruie ond in cccordance with Section 55 of -ttie Act, 1927, if timber or forest produce is not the properry of -tne Sovernment ond forest offence has been committed, then vehicie Wid other artieies may be confiscated oniy upon conviction of the offender for such forest offence. i.e. in case of timber or forest produce i3 not the property of the ©overnment,then for confiscatiori of vehicie and other srticies conviction of offender for commission of forest offer.ce is sine quanan. ^ 10.In order to confiscate such vehicie and o-ther articies the prosecution or 1+se 5tate is required to prove inat offender has been convicted, thereafter v'ehicie or articies may be confiscated by ti-ie authorized authorilY. In 1fte present case, State authorities have not fiied cny docuiTient to prove -t+ie fact •mat -rtie offender hos been convicted for commiSSion of such forest offence. 11. In absence of such proof i.e. conviction of the offender, vehicle snd other articles were not iiabie for confiscation in terms of Section 55 of •tne Act, 1927. By confiscating the vehicie and affirming the order of confiscation the authorized nu-tftorfiy, appeiiute authority ond revisionai outhorit/ have committed 'iilegality and jurisdictiona! error. Order impugned and orders V- ^•^;'^^^i:S^S'. T V^aSL•^ '"Sl -^ passsd by -itie appaiiate au'rtiority ana authorized authont/ for confiscation of vehicie are not sustainabie under •Hie iffliiii. 12. Consequentiy, the petition deserves to be aiiowed and it is hereby aiiowed. Order of confiscation dated 22.3.2000 passed by 1+ie authorized authority and Sub Divisionai officer, airagarh, order dated 30.8.2000 passed by •riie qspeiiate Authori-ty and Conservator of Forest, Ourg cmd the order dated 28.2.2001 passed by the Fifth Additionai Sessions Jud9e, &urg, in Crimmai Revision No.253/2000 are hsreby quashed. No order as to costs. Sd/- , TRSharma Judge lj(- d' f<^" f^ i?^: i -c"t.t,i ..73 ,i,'a t't r .:{j'. aA iii ^Ss^SS'