\ /^3 HI6H COURT QF CHHAmSSARH 4T BALASPUR (SB: Hon'bis Mr. T.P. Sharmc, J.) W»?* S^A'*a-t» KS-t Sy^R -"& ^Cifi'^. ffrit i'stition No.SUB of ZUQ3 Bit'g'rl'Hta Ladhcram Hemnuni vs. The 5t<xt€of Chhaittis^urh crid ottieps PpST FOR PR;PNOUNCE/AE^'STOFJ~HE_OR&EROS'-L3Q/11/201 Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ....i-^^it^ .'",„* ""^ I- ••Hl"t<lt Ti£lU rfw *>-ji yiB* ^UU .Att«<£i"S~^i<LSI-«Aa 33Tg ^i ittiSi ii TiAi&r^ ^f^/\/in, i %»^s 1L»nr!f-ti i .i.t.?<yftr^n r^ j G£-^»f^*Sv~\^\ Wnt PetltiGn No, 508 of 2003 yfffu r»&fsi*un vl &Vv^1 LGGfiuraiTs 'r'lsrrinctHi^ u^ci Gbout 3^ V€i*£rs.SC*ri OT ^3!''iri ^sXi^uSf'Qr^ i*^Sf¥ir'!^r'ii ^lndh So^ <VuH. MiGi" Rocd UOE'igi'srgGori, DiSTi.KQjncirsu^uon (Chhs+t'sgurh) t!!^?a»!li«P^ esieispv? BUWHT* Versus 1. i h£. ^>!ui£ Gi CnnuTTiS^^rn^ TrirOU^n '• S^cret&ry', porest DKpart^ieFit. D.K.S» Mcmtr'aiisy, Raipu" (C6). L. ihs AppeHate AutiioriTy Cum- Co'ris^r'v<itort c'f For's.st^ D"-!?1^ Ci^cl^. Durg Distt.Durg (CG) 3. Sub-bivisionai' Officer, Forest (Ssri£rui)^ AL'thorls&d Aiithority, Rajnaidgaon, District Rajnaidgson (C6) . (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constilution of Indiu) Mi- E/ /" .*.;;*t" ££LL-^.?«^.; iSI-* s 5 .»t|n_^*.l p^.K.,C. t iWGFi, ^SHEOE" AuVOCdT£ WiTh /Vlr.^'B'iCXShi U»nU3htSfi^ r^dY'OCuTS i0r iS pStltlOHSr* r.Sushii &ubey, 6overnnient Advocate for the respondents.' 5tute. /C?S* U"—-"l~S-sAs". i3 (58: Mon'bieMr.T.P. , J.) ORDER fPasssd ors 30T" November, 2011^ *j;/« •*L»,»i. 1. By this petition under Article 226/227 of ine ConstiTution of India The petitioner has chalisnged the iegaiity and propriety of the order dsted 10.1.20u3 passed by the First Additionai Sesslons Judge, burg, in Criminal R&yision Nv.K53/2002^ cxffiriTiiuy ths or'dsr dGtcd 2.11.2002 pusseci by the Appeliute Auti'iority end Conservctor of Forest, burq under Forest Act in Or'der No.277, affirniing the orde.i"' dated 6.6.2002 passeci by iTie i authorizsd aythority' and Sub &iv'isiono.i Officer (Fo?'sst), Rujnandgison )25 t»Sf¥^' unaer Forest Act reiating to P.O.R. No.881/20, whereby the authorized authority sand Sub Div'isionai Officer has psssed the order of confiscation of ve.hicje No. /.A.O.R.8642 on We ground that the petitioner was not havinf Transit pass/vaiid perrriit for transportation of »vood. The uppeiiaTe authority and revisionai authorit/ have affir'med •me order passed by the authorized authority. 2. The short question of ia'w' inyoived iri irie present case is whether Wie yshids^ tvvlS^ bO£ATS^ FOpSS^ chaiHS Qnd Gthsr articles used for th^be.r or fore.st produce which iri sither C^SB is riGt ths property of 'tiis Sov'emrTtent ond in rsspsct of which ths for'sst offence hiis bs.sn confimittgd^ ccu'i be cofsflscQted without convlctiori of l4is Gffende.r in tsrrrsS of SsctiQri 55 of the Zndicn Forest Act, 1927 (for- short Tne Act, 1927'}. ^*^'^~* "^* ? .^ S^^S S^ p^?j^S? '&+~iA^^5A ^?Wi ^* ^^"n'*yfc^^ ' ^'i^ s *-** i tJt t.-rt ^fc . As per nutshcli Cuiss, the pc.tttiorisr was tr'uj'ispGrtiii^/cGrryi^g tusi wood t,,,..,;-.„„ bStOH^aHQ iQ OH®(A^rlcul't'uriSs R©rnii^G'HGfTii sTi^tidi^^ In hls own ursUH^l3^?3?H! lO.itd. Ai ThS Eim£ Gi iTGHSporTo.T'orE Ths psTITIons.i" or Q^rlcuiTuriST RG.IT^U ^/QsTidlTii WSF6 FfOT r'GtyiH^ uriy TFCulStT p£l33 Or yusiu p6m"i3T Tor Tr'GrtSpor'dTiori ot such ior€;3t pr0cluC&. t'orisst produce Qson^ wlTh yghicis W£FS s&izsu- After intimatlor. under Section 52 (4) of the Act, 1927 the isu-rtiorized uUthOrlTy QtHCt ^?uu DiViSa&fKXl C/iTiC^F^ f^utJHui'ld^uOH ii'iitiCit^^ CwnTiSCu'iOn pr-ocssdlE's^ uud ciit^r providiFi^ oppo?"iunBiy of' h&oririy to 'tns pQrslGS, orusr of confESCcition rslextin^ to vshicls b^lon^iri^ to l?i€ petitioner hQS besn pcssed. Saiii® was chulienged before the cppeilats author'ity snci Conssrv'stor ot ior-'E3t^ DuTy exnd cppsliuts atiitiOrity huS G.tiiri^^d ths ordsr passed by the uuthoi'ized csuthui'i'ty. Again 11' 'A'uS chaiienged be-fore the pi?''3t Additionui S^ssloris J'dd^e, Dur^ !n ^ij'sn"if?'ta! Revision No.563/2002 cuid by the order intpuqned the revisionai Court h.as uiso cffirrned the orders. Z have heard iearned counsei for the parties, perused the order inipugned, ordci's of the au'riionzed authority and uppeiiute uuthority and copies of o 'Ti&r cfocurTtS.riTs Tiisu on &£iiuis 07 TriS pSiiTiOHSr* Bli *!ll|!i!i:^l"' \n -'? 3* L^sr'E't&u coufiSSt Tor" Trie pe.TisiOriSr 'vSnSiTiSHTiy <3i'B^U8€S shdT Sf^pOFi^lT ^usstioi'i of SuW involve. irs ^fie prGSsnt case for considsr-CLtion is wh^ther in CuSs oT TsiTi&sr or TorESs prOuUCS noT &S!GH^iH^ TO 'friS ^oy'srFiiT^sfsT uny torest ottence i3 committed then whettier wlthout convlc" or TI Gissndsr/ v&hlcls., tools, bGGts^ rop^s, ch<xl^s QTEd Otti&r urtlci^s CGH bs confiscGted. LcQmsd counss;! fijrthsr crgue.d tha1" iri orde.r to pass ths order cortfiscGtiori rei&tifi^ to tinibe.r ond for^st prodiice. not belvFi^ing to ihc, U! ^>!^T£ S?0'y£m?T's^Hi CGHV'iCTSOrS Os TflQ GTTSn^S.y iS S!H€f^US f7s?n ifs ueCGF<jd1iC£ •witii Section 55 of the Act, 1927. Learned counsei aiso argued that in the pr-ss^nt Cu3^, ths. o'TfSnd&r hois b^SU GCi^Ustt^dt c-VSFE Oin€.rWiS£thg. ^>Tt3t£ has not prorfuced any document to show thnt offender has been convicted, "m^rsfors., co?ifi3Cui1'iori of such forest producs WGS Hot ie^exEly posslblB for uuthoriz^d uuthority in Gccordaric& w'Eth SsctioFi 55 of iris Act,, 19^7. &. ^/H th^ OthSF nuHd^ l£<3im©d^OVGmiTiSFu AdVOCOtt'S sOr ih£5(Ui€./rSSpOnu£ifii r5pj303£.d T?^£ pSiiTiGFI uu^CE fflF^US.Cl Tr'i&T itsS pFSSSHi pSTliIOnSF WGlS eronsporEiFi^ Tns Tor-ssT prouucs &y i'lis v©hid€wiTi^oLi! Giny Trc^iiSit puss OE" VuSI^ p£F18??iiT, t?^ *tTi£3S CirCuiTt3TOBfIC£3/ v'SltSCiS WGi3 Eiu&SS TOr COf under Section 52 of the Act. 1927 and by corifiscating the vehicie ons ^f'flmiift^ th®ordgr of confiscextion 'tt^e ^Sj^ll^te; CAUtiiority <snd s^yisioriixl SUEnOE'*isy h0t*v£ HOs COiTii'^IKSu QHy iii£^oiity weitrrQnTEi'i^ li'iTsrTsrsncs ifE exercise of supervisory jurisdiction under fir-ticie 227 of the (..onstitution O) l.fEUiG.^ /. SpscsQi prGvlSiGn rsiistHig to coriTiSCutlos'! Oi vshicis^ toots, boais, ropss, ehaihs <^Tid othsr drticlss hu3 bSttH HTiade in S&ction 52 of the Act, 1927 by iVi.P. Ameridment Act No.25 of 1933. Ssctiori 55 of the Act, 1927 has atso u6SH u"?i€.Fiu£uWtl'Ch r£0.<33u3 unosr^" '55. Forest prGciut^, tools, stc./ Vyh£?i iiGbls to CGnsiSCfli'tlon." (^1} Ail tsmbsr or iorss! proc3uc£ vit'hlch ari ©its'isrCGS£ a3 not 'me; prop^r'Ty ot ths ^ovsrrs^snt re5peci ch u t'ore.st ottss'ics hu3 bSSfi COiT'iiTiittSCt, "Ut,^ \ f ~y /- ! s^^^i-''*' wk.s'w^s^^. *:lE?M|3SI<ik- • ~^-- (3nd dii toois, boCtts, v'shicSss^ ropss, chains or uny otiicr ctrticle, \n ss.ch C(2se 'used in coiTtiiRitting ciny forsst- offsnce, shuii subjsct to pr'oviSions of sections 52, 52-A, D^-^ QS^!^ Qi^-C- &S ijCE&IS TG CGnTfSGCiTiOn U|30S'? CCSflvKCtlOfi Oi ts'i®©TTsnrisrior such [Or'e.st-oTiGncs. {^.) ^?UCh CGHjiSCfitiiOH FnGy* &% iH GuCiSTiOM )0 eEHy' Oth^r pUriiSTimSni priESCFiD^u TOF SUCR OTTSi'iCS^ 8. As per Section 52 of the Act, 1927, g€Rer-<2l procsduir-e hus b^n pr^scribs<i Tvi?" conTt^cGTiOi'i G) yshiCite, To'o33, &oQi3, Giitu othsr uriacS^s uss^ In COnRIT^iSSiGH GS •uP'^ST OTil£HGS, &UT 3p£Ci£3iprOv'iSiOFt FSSiSTiHy TO COi^fSSCGTiGn OT VShSC>£ uHC3 OThSr ui"TSCi£3 Li3£€3iFi COiTii^fliSSiOri OT TGFSST GTiSrtC^ IH WriiCni tiiTsbsi" or forsst pE"oduc©srs not prop&rty of 'iri^ Stuts; ^ov'£i"iii^%nt h<xs b£^H iT^GdS iH ^&CilOn t?.? O) th£Act, 1?27. y^ i^scTiGH DO oT Tue AC), l;?'^/ i3 £5€cepsioniG ysn^FGi ru!®Qnci in o.ccoruGi'ics "tTi •^SCilO?1 SI5 OT ThS ^cT lyc-/, i; aim&sr or TO^^ST pi"O^UC£ 53 HOa TS^£ propsrfy oT iri^ ^ovsmiTisyiiT ^"iu jorssT oTisncs hGS tss®?"! comtTiiTTiSci, Thsf! vshicls und other urticies ^uy bs confjsf^stsd oniy upon convictlGH of the offandsr for such for^st offerice. i.e. in coss of tin'ibsr or forsst produce is not ths propsrty of the ^oysrniTtent, thsn for c&n'fiSCGtioi'i of vshici©CiTsd o'H'isr articies conv'ictlGH of offsncier for coi^missioi'i of forsst Gffencs is ssns gua r.on. ,*—jAA!Ln* —u"4*S~iAs**!*j 10.-Ln ordsr to confiSCQts such yshiCis ond othc-r ar-tlcles 'ltie prosscutiOri or thc 5t^2i£ i3 r£<<u!i"Su TO prOV'€ thGi Ott'Gi'idSF rli^S bSGH CGriyiCi»d, th^fSuftsi" vehicls or urticies mcTy be coFifiscuted by 'H'ss Gutliorszed suthorily. Xn the pr&sent co^^ Stdte ^jthoritiss huv& not filgd CtHy' csocurTtSnT TG proys T^ss TQCT thutT The oTTsriusr hQ3 &SSH conv*ECi^<3 TO^ COfnETtiSStGil Oi SUCrl TG?'S£3! i/|T£nC£. 11. TH ubS81^C€ &f SuCh ppoof i.£. coriV'ictioH of 'tts^ vff&nder, vshicla Graci Gther /artlcl^s W£r'€?iot iii3ibi£ for corifiscGtivi'! in tcriT'iS of SsctEori 55 of the Act/ / X?SL/-> ^V COHT(SCG"IS'iG itl^ V'SiJ?!C!® ^Hd uit'ir??itrt£i (1^6 Oii*dS?' G't COHTiSCSTiOH l^>- £T- ttte authorized authori-ty, qspeiiate authorit'y and revisional auinority have conimitted iilegaiity arid jur'isdictionai error. Order impugned snd or-ders pGisss.d by thtt ispp&ilist®Guthority und GU'tTlOrlzsd OujthoFit^ foF CGFtfiSCutiOH of vehicie are not sustainubie under the iaw'. ,2*Con3s^u£i'iny,ths pB'tition dsssryes to b©CiilGW£d Gitdi it i3 hSF-Gby <2.IsOW£d. C/r'u£fi GT COnTiSCGnGri CiG'tSCi v.€?.^UU^ pu3S6u toy Tfis uu'?tionz£€3GiuThGr~iiy uFid ^?u£> DiViSiGnCXl GTliCSF'1, RS|n0^iC3guGiHt, OFuSr CiG'^u ^..ll.c-wc. iH UrGSF No.2T7 pssssd by ths ctppwiiests Aiithority arsd Conssryoitor of Fo^st, Dur'9 anc! the order dated SO.1.2003 passed by the First Additionai Sessions ^JUCSgS, OUF^, iH C-E'iH^iri^S RSViSiOFi r^o,'3v-3/^uu^ cxrs t's&rs&y ^uciSl'i^d, NG yt'ues.r" us? iu Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge •(4A/