C.R. Sarma, J.

1. By this application, filed under Section 482 read with Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for short, Cr.P.C.), the petitioner i.e. the Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorized Officer, Guwahati Wildlife Division, has challenged the orders, dated 08.05.2014 and 225.05.2014, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, directed release of the vehicle seized in connection with KWL/8/Offence/2014/674-75, under Sections 27/29/50(1) of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 (hereinafter called, the Act) in favour of the respondent, who claimed to be the registered owner of the said vehicle. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, on 01.04.2014, at about 3 A.M., the Forester-1, Khanapara Wildlife Range, 10th Mile, Jorabat, Guwahati, while performing night patrolling dury, in Pathalipani area, inside Amchang Wildlife Sanctuary, found that a Bolero pick up van bearing No. AS-01-EC- 9210 i.e. the seized vehicle, was used in unauthorisedly carrying teak logs from Amseng Wildlife Sanctuary. The Driver of the said vehicle was also found in the vehicle.

2. Accordingly, the said vehicle and the teak logs were taken to the range headquarters and seized vide Memo No. KWL/8/Offence/2014/674-75, under Sections 27/29 and 50(1)(C) of the Act.

Accordingly, on 10.04.2014, an offence report was submitted with the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati.

3. The respondent, claiming to be the registered owner of the said vehicle, by filing an application, approached the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, seeking release of the said vehicle.

4. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, by order, dated 08.05.2014, exercising power under Section 451 Cr.P.C., came to the findings that the investigation into the case was completed and that the offence report was also submitted.

With the above observations, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, by his order, dated 08.05.2014, directed release of the seized vehicle, in the custody of the petitioner, subject to execution of bond of Rs. 6 Lakhs with the condition that the vehicle should not be alienated and that the same would be produced before the Court as and when required. Accordingly, the seizing authority was directed to submit compliance report on 22.05.2014.

5. Despite receiving the said order, the vehicle was not released and the seizing authority informed the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate that the seized vehicle was forwarded to the Divisional Forest Officer and that the Divisional Forest Officer initialed confiscation proceeding in respect of the said vehicle.

6. On being so informed, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, by his order, dated 22.05.2014, directed the Divisional Forest Officer, Guwahati Wildlife Division to immediately comply with the order, dated 08.05.2014, with regard to the release of the seized vehicle. By the said order, a compliance report was also called for fixing the case on 02.06.2014.

7. On 07.06.2014, the private respondent, by filing an application i.e. Petition No. 2707, dated 07.06.2014, informed the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate that the seized vehicle was not handed over to him and that the direction, made by the orders, dated 08.05.2014 and 22.05.2014, were not complied with.

8. In view of the above, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate directed the Divisional Forest Officer i.e. the present petitioner as well as the seizing authority, to submit a report with regard to the non compliance with the said direction. Hence, the petitioner i.e. the Divisional Forest Officer, has come up with this petition for quashing of the said orders, made by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M), Guwahati.

9. Mr. R.K. Bora, the learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam, referring to the provision prescribed by Section 50 of the Act, has submitted that the concerned vehicle was used for unauthorizedly carrying forest produce and as such the same has been rightly seized by the fo