IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.547 OF 2001 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.547 OF 2001 CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.547 OF 2001 State of Maharashtra ..Petitioners Versus Mahendra Ramprakash Kapoor ..Respondent ---- Mr.A.R.Patil APP for the petitioner/State. None for the respondent. ---- Coram : R.S.Mohite,J Coram : R.S.Mohite,J Coram : R.S.Mohite,J Date : 11.4.2008. PC 1. Respondent though served, has chosen not to engage any Advocate nor present in person. This is a Writ petition filed by the State impugning a judgment and order dated 12.7.2000 passed by the Sessions Judge, Thane in Criminal Appeal No.24 of 2000. The matter in appeal concerned the confiscation of a vehicle which was seized while illegally carrying forest produce viz. woodlog and wooden planka, without permit. After following due process of law, an order of confiscation came to be passed on 29.3.2000 by Mr.V.K.Mohan, Conservator of the Forest department of Thane. Against the order of confiscation, criminal appeal was preferred by the appellant before the Sessions Court at Thane. : 2 : This appeal has been allowed and while allowing the appeal, the Sessions Court has given a reason that the appellant was a transferee of the vehicle who came into picture as an owner of the vehicle later on perhaps after the commission of the crime or while the vehicle had been on the road for doing its regular business with the consent of the old owner. This reasoning is most vague and indicates complete non application of mind. There are no dates given as to when the transfer was effected in law. Yet another reason given by the Sessions Judge was in the following words :- " There is no record produced by the Forest Department to show that the trasnfer was purposeful and that the transferee owner of this vehicle had also indirect complicity of his own carrying of the forest produce viz. the planks and the logs inside the Tempo in the midnight of 30.4.1999 in the purchase tempo before the date of purchase but after the actual date of purchase had already taken place in between himself and the old owner. Unless this position is proved on record by the Forest Department, it is difficult to sustain the impugned order of confiscation as legal and proper." : 3 : 2. The aforesaid reasoning is not coherent. It was necessary for the appellate Court being the last Court of fact, to deal with the question as to whether the enquiry was properly conducted as against the right person. Similarly, all facts pertaining to the transfer ought to have been properly dealt with by the Sessions Judge. I find that there is no proper application of mind while passing the impugned order. In the circumstances, Writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause-(b) and the matter is remanded back to the Sessions Judge, Thane, for passing a proper reasoning order on the basis of the record. A proper judgment and order would be passed after considering the record within a period of six months from today. Petition disposed off accordingly. (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J)