IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Criminal Revision No. 173 of 2003 Date of Decision: 25.05.2010 __________________________________________________________ State of H.P. & another. ….Petitioner. Versus Gian Chand. ….Respondent. ___________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No __________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. For the Respondent: Mr. Vinay Thakur, Advocate. __________________________________________________________ Dev Darshan Sud, J. (Oral) The State is in revision against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan, camp at Nalagarh in appeal having been preferred by the respondent herein against the order passed by the Authorized Officer (Divisional Forest Officer, Nalagarh) under Section 52-A of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, as amended by H.P. Second Amendment (Act No. 15 of 1991) (herein after referred to as “Act”), directing the confiscation of tractor trolly No. HIA-6290 involved in the offence of transporting illicit timber. Respondent appealed to the learned Sessions Judge under Section 59 (2) of the 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes 2 Act. The learned Appellate Court held that the statutory provisions of the Act have not been complied with the order can not be sustained. The State is now in appeal. I need not to go into the facts of the case, as the matter securely covered by the judgment of this Court passed in Cr. Revision No. 30 of 1994 decided on 7th November, 1997 titled State of H.P. Vs. Dhanwant Singh. This Court, considering the provisions of Section 59 of the Act holds as under: “10. Two new Sections, namely, Sections 59-A and 59-B also came to be inserted in the Principal Act by the Amending Act. Sections 59-A and 59-B so inserted, read:- “59-A. Revision.—Any forest officer not below the rank of Conservator of Forests, specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf by notification published in the Official Gazette, may, before the expiry of thirty days from the date of order of the authorized officer under section 52-A, suo motu call for and examine the records of that order and may make such enquiry or cause such enquiry to be made and may pass such orders as he deems fit; Provided that no order prejudicial to a person shall be passed under this section without giving him an opportunity of being heard. 59-B. Bar of jurisdiction in certain cases.--- Whenever any timber (excluding fuelwood), resin, khair wood and katha together with any tool, rope, chain, boat or vehicle used in committing any forest 3 offence is seized under section 52, the authorized officer under sub-section (1) of section 29-A or the Sessions Judge hearing an appeal under sub-section (2) of section 59 shall have, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Central Act 2 of 1974) or in any other law for the time being in force, any other officer, Court, Tribunal or authority shall not have, jurisdiction to make order with regard to custody, possession, delivery, disposal or distribution of such property.” I do not find that it is a fit case where I should exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. This revision petition is accordingly disposed of. 2. This order will not pre-empt/overrule any directions which have been issued in the criminal cases relating to the confiscation of the timber. May 25, 2010 (Dev Darshan Sud), (KRS) Judge