._^^1--L—.._. ^. ^\'^ I^^E_HIGHCQuRT-OFCHHA^^^ Writ Petition No. 1798 of 2004 ^w^ Petitioner Smt Vandaaa Dubey, W/o Shn Santosh Dubey, aged about 24 years, R/o Mathguda, Jagdaipiir, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) Versus Respondents 1. The Conservator of Forest, Circle, Jagdalpiir, Distt, Bastar, 2. Autliorised Ofllcer aiid Sub Divisional Forest Officer, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 3. Sessions Judge, Bastar at Jagdalpur WK1T PmTnON UNDEK AKT1CLE 226/227 OPTHE CONSTITUTION OF !ND!A (SB: Hon'bie Shn Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shri Manoj Mishra, Advocate for fhe petitiouer, Shri Shashaak Thakur, Paael Lawyer for the respondents. QRDER (Passed on this 22nd Day ofSeptember, 2008) 1. With the consent ofleanied counsel appearing Ibr the parties, fhe laatter is heard fiaatlv. 2. The petitioner is said to be the owner of the vehicle (Trax), having rcgistration No. MP-25-B/0307. On 9.6.2002 ia a search niade by ttie poMce party of police station Bodhghat, District - Jagdalpiir, fhe vehicle was found canying teak wood (sagon farra), The poMce iaibrmed fhe raage ojGticer Machkot, where F'orest Case No. 659/2002 was registered by fhe respondent No.2. By oider dated 17.3.2003 (Annexiirc P/ 1) fhe Prescribed Officer aad Sub Divisional Officer, Forest, Jagdalpur confiscated fhe vehicle, fiadiag that fhe vehicle ia question was iavolved ra iUlegal transportation of teak wood. '^ ^ ^^^r^^^ -ry^ '\ ^iSS^ 1 ^W^ j %^y/ ^^^^^' ^' W^UMS^ 3. 2. ^ The appeal filed against the order dated 17.3.2003 was rejected by order dated 30.9.2003 (Anuexurc P/2) passed by the Conservator ot ^orest, Circle Jagdalpui'. 'l'herealter the petitioner filed a revision which was disnussed by im.pugned order dated 11.2.2004 (Annexure P/6) passed by tlie Sessions Judge, Baster, Jagdalpur ia Unregistered Criniiaal Revision No. 00/04 ou tiie ground that the revision was filed with unexplamed delay of one raonth and twenty tvvo days. Having heai'd learned counsel appeaiing for the parties, perused th.e records and documents appended thereto, it is evident that the reason of delay, caused ia. tlliag the revision, is not considered properly by the Court below. The petltioner has explaLned tfie delay, the Court below ought to have accepted the reasons ±brcoxidonatLon of delay and registered the case tbr decision on cierits. Having regard to the facts situation of the case, the delay in iiiing revision beibre the Court of Sessions Judge, Baster, is condoned. The impugned order dated 11.2.2004 (Amiexure P/6), passed in Uni'egistered Crmunal Kevision No. 00/04 (Siat. Vandna Dubey Vs. Couservator of Porest, Jagdalpur & another) is set aside. 'I'he matter is remaaded to fhe Court below to consider and decide the matter on nierits afresh. The petition is allowed fo the above extent. No order asto costs, Consequentiy, M(W)P JNo. 1608/ 2004 is also disposed of. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Thakur