IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC NO.127 OF 2010 1. KANHAIYA SHARMA, SON OF LATE FAGU SHARMA, 2. SIYA RAM, SON OF LATE KASHI NATH, BOTH RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE ELIYA, POLICE STATION ELIYA, DISTRICT CHANDAULI (U.P.)………..PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND MINERALS, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE COLLECTOR, KAIMUR (BHABHUA) 4. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, SAHABAD FOREST DIVISION, SASARAM 5. ASSISTANT MINING OFFICER, KAIMUR (MOHANIA) 6. ASSISTANT MINING OFFICER, ROHTAS AT SASARAM 7. FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KALYANIPUR……………………………………..RESPONDENTS-IST SET 8. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH, SON OF SRI BACHCHAN SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BODRA KHURD, POLICE STATION CHAKIYA, POST OFFICE- PACHWANIA/CHAKIYA, DISTRICT – CHANDAULI (U.P.)…………………………………………….…………RESPONDENT-2ND SET ----------- 4. 12.04.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have filed this writ application for release of their tractor bearing registration no. UP-67/3316 which was seized in connection with Case no.102 (F)/09 on the suspicion that the same was being used for illegal transportation of stone chips from protected mines. Petitioners are owners of the tractor and their case is that they had given their tractor to respondent no.8 on hire which was being used for carrying stone chips without - 2 - their knowledge. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that a case under the provisions of the Indian Forest Act has been instituted and a confiscation case is pending against the accused before the Divisional Forest Officer which may take long time to conclude and during this period, if the tractor is left in open, the same may be damaged due to vagaries of the nature. Therefore, he submits that petitioners’ tractor may be released to them subject to the final result of the confiscation proceeding. Learned counsel for the State opposes the said prayer of the petitioners and submits that for release of the tractor, they had applied before the Chief Judicial Magistrate which was refused. The order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate as contained in Annexure-10 with the writ application shows that he did not exercise his power since the matter is pending with the Divisional Forest Officer. Be that as it may, petitioners are directed to file an application before the - 3 - Divisional Forest Officer, Sahabad Forest Division, Sasaram for release of the aforesaid tractor during the pendency of the proceeding. If such an application is filed by the petitioners, the Divisional Forest Officer shall consider the same and in view of the delay which may be caused in the proceeding, shall release the tractor in favour of the petitioners on such terms and conditions and security and bond as he may feel appropriate within a period of two months from the date of filing of such application. The order of such release shall be subject to the final result of the confiscation proceeding and petitioners will not derive any advantage in the proceeding on the basis of such release. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. B.T (J. N. Singh, J.)