Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
SUNIL B SHUKRE, PUSHPA V GANEDIWALA, JJ.
SYED BURHAN SYED NABI - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 282 of 2016
Decided on : 04-05-2019
Bombay Forest Rules, 1942 – Rules 66, 80, 82, 88 and 129 – Indian Forest Act, 1927 – Sections 61, 42 – Confiscation – Transit Pass – Order of dismissal – Petition is directed against an order of dismissal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, in Criminal Appeal of the petitioners under Section 61-D of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, – Said appeal arose out of the order passed by the Assistant Conservator of Forests in confiscation proceedings initiated under Section 61-A of the said Act of 1927. – Held, Law is well settled and it lets us know that any likelihood of the commission of an offence cannot take the place of or be equated with the term reason to believe that an offence has been committed. – Subjective satisfaction of the Authority regarding his reasonable belief about the commission of the offence is sine-qua-non for the order of confiscation. As stated earlier, so far as concerned the confiscation of the 52 cut sized logs which were found in the Marshall Jeep of the petitioner no. 1, passing through Morna Bridge without valid transit pass, in our opinion, no error has been committed by the learned Authorised officer. – Therefore, confiscation of the ICON Car, in the backdrop of the present facts and circumstances, does not appear to be legal and proper. – Though both the Courts below have rightly reached to the conclusion for confiscation of Marshall Jeep as it was carrying forest produce i.e. 52 teak wood logs without transit pass, however, as regards, confiscation of ICON Car bearing, their conclusion does not appeal to the reason. – Court feel it apposite to record here that the forests have their own importance and the importance has already been acknowledged not only in the ancient past but also in the modern times. – Realizing this importance, the British enacted the Forest Act, 1927. – The value of forest has been more realized today than it was before. – The destruction of forest and natural resources had their deleterious effect on the mankind. – To reduce them, the concepts like sustainable development, water conservation, carbon capture, polluters pay, reduction carbon footprints, conservation of bio-reserves and so on have been evolved now. – They would even stress the fact as to how valuable is our green umbrella. – This means every tree, every plant, everything animate or inanimate present in the forest has the protection of law including that of the constitution. – This would call for a sensitive approach while dealing with cases involving forest offence and this is what court have done here. – Writ Petition Disposed of
PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.
2. This petition is directed against an order of dismissal dated 8th March, 2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, in Criminal Appeal No. 29 of 2011 of the petitioners under Section 61-D of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1927). The said appeal arose out of the order dated 29.12.2008 passed by the Assistant Conservator of Forests in confiscation proceedings initiated under Section 61-A of the said Act of 1927.
3. In the impugned confiscation proceedings, the learned Authorized Officer directed confiscation of Marshall Jeep bearing registration No. MH 30-AF 294 and 52 cut sized teak wood logs ad-measuring 0.501 cubic meters as the same was being transported without transit pass. A Ford ICON Car bearing registration No. MH-26-M-786 was also confiscated as the same was being used in the commission of the offence under the Forest Act of 1927.
4. The factual matrix, in brief, necessary to decide the present petition is as under :
(i) The Petitioner No. 1 claims to have a license for carrying on business of manufacturing furniture etc. in the name and style as "National Industries" at Patur, Dist-Akola. As an ancillary business, he is selling and purchasing teak wood. Petitioner no.2 is a driver and Petitioner no.3 is running the business of Carpentry at Akola.
(ii) It is the case of petitioner no.1 that he had purchased 119 teak wood logs standing in the field of Mr. Lachhu Sitaram Rathod bearing Survey No.183/1 at Village Sawargaon. The same was transported to Patur after obtaining transit pass bearing No. 222898 on 14.06.2008. Vide order dated 29.06.2008 bearing No.355/200-09 the Forest Department granted permission to petitioner no.1 to convert 119 teak wood logs into customized finished goods from time to time and lastly the permission was extended upto 20.12.2008 and the same was verified by the Forest Department. Petitioner no.1 further submitted that he had purchased another 139 teak wood logs ad-measuring 7.361 cubic meters in an auction conducted by the Forest Department. The said 139 teak wood logs were transported vide transit pass bearing no.647127 from Shendurjana Depot to Patur, vide order dated 08.08.2008. It is further stated that the Forest Department vide order No.501/2008-09 dated 21.08.2008 granted permission to petitioner no.1 to convert 139 teak wood logs into customized finished goods from time to time.
(iii) It is further the case of petitioner no.1 that he converted teak wood logs into customized finished goods and sought to sell 52 cut sized finished teak wood logs ad-measuring 0.501 cubic meters on 29.12.2008 to Mr. Sayyad Ayaz Syed Ayub, R/o Akola. As per his request, the finished goods were to be delivered at Akola. Petitioner no.1 had arranged for transportation of the finished goods in his Marshall Jeep bearing No. MH 30-AF 294. Accordingly, a bill dated 29.12.2008 was raised by petitioner no.1 amounting to Rs.17,262/- inclusive of VAT @4%.
(iv) The grievance of petitioner no.1 is that on 29.12.2008 the Forest Officer stopped his Marshall Jeep bearing No. MH 30-AF 294 during transit from Patur to Akola. On account of non availability of transit pass, the said Marshall Jeep was seized under Section 52 of the said Act of 1927. Seizure Panchanama was prepared in respect of the seized articles on 29.12.2008 at Forest Office, Akola. On the same day, the Forest Officer inspected ICON Car bearing registration No. MH-26-M-786 belonging to petitioner no.1, which was passing from Patur to Akola. Since, there was suspicion about the use of this Car in the commission of the crime, the said Car was also seized under Section 52 of the said Act of 1927 and a spot panchanama was drawn. The Range Forest Officer recorded the statement of witnesses.
(v) On the basis of the inquiry report, submitted by the Range Forest Officer, Patur, forest offence came to b
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
