Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
FAIJUL HOQUE S/O LATE SAKIR HUSSAIN – Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR – Respondent
Crl.Rev.P./173/2022
Decided on : 30-08-2022
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 397/401/482 read with Section 451 - Truck - Vehicle - Teak logs - Seized - On forest official of Beat and Assam Forest Protection Force (AFPF) personnel, while performing patrolling duty at area on NH-54, intercepted one vehicle, bearing Registration No. which was coming from Mizoram, carrying teak logs with T.P. No., dated - But logs were found unmarked and doubtful and after due verification and unloading, 132 numbers of teak logs were found in truck - But, as per T.P., it was 121 numbers and also there was major discrepancy in measurement of length and girth of logs - Driver of the vehicle was present at relevant time, but later on he was found fled away - Matter was reported to Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, vide letter dated and Range Forest Officer Range, also submitted one preliminary report to Divisional Forest Officer, Division, vide letter dated, informing about detaining of vehicle and followed by a detail report, dated - Notice was issued to (i) Shri Dilip Chandra Barua and (ii) M.U. Ahmed, but, same returned un-served as addressee was not found.
Finding of Court :
Court have carefully gone through case laws, referred by learned counsel for petitioner and I find that above mentioned ratio are laid down by a coordinate Bench of Court while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India and in instant case, jurisdiction being exercised by this court is revisional jurisdiction, under Sections 401/397/482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, which is only limited to examination of the legality, propriety and correctness of impugned order and as such, Court afraid ratio laid down in aforesaid cases would come into aid of petitioner - In view of above, Court find the submission so advanced , learned counsel for petitioner is devoid of any substance - No fault can be found with impugned order dated 1, passed in O.R. No., passed by Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cachar, Silchar and impugned judgment dated, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Silchar in Misc. Appeal No.11/2020.
Result : Criminal revision petition stands dismissed
JUDGMENT :
1. Legality, propriety and correctness of the judgment and order dated 07.03.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, at Cachar, Silchar, in Misc. Appeal No. 13/2020, and also the order dated 17.01.2020, passed by the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cachar Division, Silchar, in O.R. No. DH/6 of 2018-19, DVL 65 of 2019-20, are impugned in this revision petition under Sections 397/401/482 read with Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2. It is to be noted here that vide impugned order dated 17.01.2020, passed in O.R. No. DH/6 of 2018-19, DVL 65 of 2019-20, the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cachar Division, Silchar, confiscated the vehicle of the petitioner, bearing Registration No. AS-17B-9317, to the department, and vide impugned judgment and order dated 07.03.2022, passed in Misc. Appeal No. 13/2020, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, at Cachar, Silchar, has affirmed the order of the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cachar Division, Silchar, dated 17.01.2020.
3. The factual background, leading to filing of this petition, is briefly stated as under:
Point of Law : 19. Vehicle seized for committing forest offence was not normally to be released to party till culmination of all proceedings in respect of forest offence as particular approach in mat....
Point of law : 14. Vehicle seized for committing forest offence was not normally to be released to the party till culmination of all proceedings in respect of forest offence as particular approach in....
Point of Law : 14. Vehicle seized for committing forest offence was not normally to be released to party till culmination of all proceedings in respect of forest offence as particular approach in mat....
Point of Law : 18. Vehicle seized for committing forest offence was not normally to be released to party till culmination of all proceedings in respect of forest offence as particular approach in mat....
The main legal point established is that the owner of a vehicle used in a forest offence may not be held responsible if they can prove lack of knowledge or connivance, as per Section 49(6) of the AFR....
When there is reason to believe that a forest-offence has been committed in respect of any forest-produce, such produce together with all tools, boats, carts or cattle used in committing any such off....
Administrative property seizure is a temporary measure pending criminal conviction. Excessive, unexplained delay in investigation violates the constitutional right to a speedy trial, justifying the q....
Confiscation under the Orissa Forest Act requires proof of a forest offence and adherence to procedural safeguards, failure of which invalidates the confiscation order.
The petitioner failed to establish that his vehicle was used without his knowledge, as required by Section 56(2-c) of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972, demonstrating insufficient proof of diligence agains....
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
