é IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ...v >§$H l" fKE WRIT PETITION 227 No. /201o \émuhnE BE§€$§§ PETITIONER/ é/unil Kumar Agrawal @ APPELLANT Pappi Agrawal, S/o Late Shri Ram Kumar Agrawal,Agt#oW R/o Morga, Tahsil Podi Uproda, District—Korba (C. G.) VERSUS 1/ State of Chhattisgarh, Through the [KPMW 9 W“? h'“ 39 ‘ _ Secretary \W RESPONDENTS and Ministry of Forest Department. 'D~\<‘$- Bhauom QeuW Conservator of Forest, Bilaspur Circle (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA y/é HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinqle Bench: Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Writ Petition (227) No.5384 of 2010 Petitioner verSUS Sunil KumarAgrawal @ Pappi Agrawal Respondents State of Chhattisgérh and another Present: e Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.R.Sinha, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents on advance notice. Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India ORAL ORDER (Passed on 21“ September, 2010) Heard on admission. 2. Challenge in this petition is to the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Bilaspur on 17-8—2010 in Criminal Revision No.83/2010, which, in turn, had arisen but of the order passed by the Conservator of Forest, Bilaspur Circle, Bilaspur on 22—5—2010 declining to grant interim custody (Supurdnama) of the confiscated vehicle Tata 407 bearing registration No.CG 12 E 701 3. 3. The subject vehicle was seized on 22-12-2007 and was subjected to confiscation proceeding before the prescribed authority. The prescribed authority by its order dated 8-1-2010 confiscated the vehicle. Appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of confiscation is pending before the ,Conservator of Forest, Bilaspur ( ‘V \Circle, Bilaspur. 4. In the matter of State of Karnataka vs. K. Krishnan, (2000) 7 SCC 80, the Hon’ble Sgpreme Court has laid down the principle as to when order for interim custody of a vehicle involved in connection of forest offence for illicit transportation of the timber should be made. Applying the principle, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Sessions Judge confirming the order passed by the Conservator of Forest, Bilaspur Circle, . Bilaspur refusing to grant interim custody of the vehicle, however, looking to the fact that the petitioner’s appeal is pending, it is directed that the appellate authority, i.e., the Conservator of Forest, Bilaspur Circle, Bilaspur should do well to dispose of the appeal as early as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of presentation of the certified copy of this order. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with the above observation. if 7 . sdl_ ,i I Prashant Kumar Mishra ‘ Judge “HM