The main legal point established is that the provisions of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, authorized the arrest and detention of suspects involved in forest offences, and the conditions of bail could be challenged under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

( 1 ) IN this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution petitioner has sought for a declaration that the detention of the petitioner's husband by name Shafi is illegal, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction and for issue of a writ in the nature of habeas corpus to the respondents directing them to release Sri Shafi and also to pay a sum of Rs. 6,000/- as compensation.

( 2 ) THE facts undisputed are as follows : on 23/03/1992 the Sub-Inspector of Police, Byadgi, caught Sri Shafi red-handed while transporting sandal-wood billets of the value of Rs. 40,000/- within the limits of Byadgi Police Station. He was driving the vehicle in which sandalwood billets were being transported. The Sub-Inspector of Police arrested him and filed a First Information Report in the concerned Police station and also produced Sri Shafi before court within 24 hours. The learned Magistrate in the first instance remanded him to judicial custody and thereafter granted bail on 3-7-1992 on the following terms : "the accused No. 1 Shaffi is released on bail on his executing a Personal Bond and two surety Bonds for Rs. 50,000-00. The accused No. 1 shall attend the Byadgi Police Station on Wednesday and Sunday between 2 to 4 p. m. in every week. The surties shall produce the solvency certificates. "

( 3 ) THE husband of the petitioner has not complied with the conditions of the bail nor he has challenged the order dated 3-7-1992 passed by the learned J. M. F. C. , Byadgi in Crime No. 43 of 1992. If the husband of the petitioner is aggrieved by the conditions imposed by the learned Magistrate, it is open to him to challenge those conditions under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure before this Court or before the Sessions Court. The husband of the petitioner has not chosen to do so. On the contrary, the present petition is filed on the basis that the conditions imposed are onerous : that the very arrest and detention of Sri Shaffi is illegal and unconstitutional, therefore, the respondents be directed to release Shri Shaffi immediately and also to pay compensation of Rs. 6,000/ -.

( 4 ) IT is contended by Sri Kashinath Rao Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner, that as the Police Sub Inspector, Byadgi, himself is the complainant and he caught Shri Shaffi red-handed while transporting sandalwood billets, he could not have arrested Sri Shaffi having regard to the provisions contained in Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

( 5 ) IT is not possible to accept the contention of Shri Kashinath Rao Patil, which overlooks the provisions contained in Chapter IX of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'act' ). Sub-Section (2) of S. 62 of the Act, empowers a Forest Officer or a Police Officer, who has reason to believe that a vehicle has been or is being used for the transport of forest produce in respect of which there is reason to believe a forest offence has been or is being committed, to require the driver or the other person incharge of such vehicle to stop the vehicle and cause it to remain stationary as long as may reasonably be necessary to examine the contents in the vehicle and inspect all records relating to the goods carried which are in the possession of such driver or other person in charge of the vehicle. Sub-Section (1) of Section 62 of the Act, empowers seizure. Sub-Section (3) thereof, further provides that every officer seizing any property under Section 62, shall place on such property or the receptacle or vehicle (if any) in which it is contained a mark indicating that the same has been so seized and shall, as soon as may, be make a report of such seizure, as provided in clauses (a) and (b) thereof. Section 74 of the Act, empowers a Forest Officer or a Police Officer to arrest without warrant any person reasonably suspected of having been concerned in any forest offence punishable with imprisonment for one month or upwards, if such person refuses to give his name and residence o