SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Gau) 579

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
DEVENDRA KUMAR YADAV S/O LATE BISHNUDEB YADAV – Appellant
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR- Respondent
Crl.Rev.P./174/2022
Decided on : 30.08.2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MR I HAQUE

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 matter would perpetuate commission of more offence with respect to forest and its produce which, if not prevented is bound to affect mother earth and atmosphere surrounding it.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Sections 401/397/482 - Assam Forest Regulation (Amendment) Act, 1995 - Section 49(4) - Truck - Logs - Seized - Staff of Beat and Assam Forest Protection Force personnel, while performing patrolling duty area on NH- 54, found one Truck bearing Registration No. NL-01K-5990, coming from Mizoram and checked same and found driver carrying teak logs without proper mark and with doubtful T.P. being No., dated - Truck was taken to Range Forest Office, and on verification and unloading Truck, 125 Nos. of teak logs were found there and as per T.P., it was 180 Nos. and with major discrepancy in measurement of length and girth of logs - Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, issued Form No. 31(B) and in his reply he stated that one person of Mizoram called him and talked to him over phone and asked him for transportation of teak logs from Mizoram after proper verification and measurement along with up-to-date T.P. and GST, to which, he agreed and transported same in his vehicle giving permission to his driver - But, during transportation, same was intercepted by forest officials - He also stated that he was completely unaware about forest rules and regulations and he promised not to repeat such offence in future and requested to release vehicle on payment of compensation, fine etc.

Finding of Court :

Court finds that same suffers from no illegality or infirmity, requiring any interference of this Court by exercising its revisional jurisdiction - Also, Court have carefully gone through case laws, referred by learned counsel for petitioner and Court find that above mentioned ratio are laid down by a coordinate Bench of this 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 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 submission so advanced by Mr. I. Hoque, learned counsel for petitioner is devoid of any substance - As vehicle has already been confiscated, question of releasing same in interim custody does not arise at this stage.

Result: Court find no merit in this criminal revision petition and accordingly, same stands dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. I. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. D. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel for the Forest Department.

2. In this petition, under Section 397/401/482, read with Section 451 Cr.P.C., preferred by the petitioner Shri Devendra Kumar Yadav, has challenged the legality, propriety and correctness of the impugned judgment and order dated 07.03.2022, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Silchar in Misc. Appeal No.12/2020, whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Cachar has dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner, and also the impugned order dated 17.01.2020, passed in O.R. No. DH/5 of 2018-20, DVL 64 of 2019-20 passed by the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cachar, Silchar, whereby the Authorized officer has confiscated the vehicle bearing Registration No. NL-01K-5990, belonging to the petitioner.

3. The factual background leading to filing of the present petition is briefly stated as under:-

    “On 12.08.2019, the staff of Lailapur Beat and Assam Forest Protection Force personnel, while performing patrolling duty at Lailapur area on NH54, found one Truck bearing Registration No. NL-01K-5990, coming from Mizoram and checked the same and found the driver carrying teak logs without proper mark and with doubtful T.P. being No. 0378746, dated 07-08-2018. Thereafter, the Truck was taken to the Range Forest Office, Dholai and on verification and unloading the Truck, 125 Nos. of teak logs were found there and as per the T.P., it was 180 Nos. and with major discrepancy in the measurement of length and girth of logs. Besides, most of the logs were found unmarked and indistinct in numbering and latter on, the driver was found fleeing away from the same thereafter, having been satisfied that the logs were being carried illegally with doubtful T.P., the same were seized by the seizure officer and issued Form No. 31(A) to 1. M. U. Ahmed of Polasbari Guwahati and 2. Devendra Kumar Yadav of Kohima, asking them to produce legal proof of the origin of forest produce within 30 days and he reported the matter to Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cacher, Silchar vide letter No. DH/13/OR/563, dated 14.08.2019, informing about details of the vehicle and a Detailed Report vide letter dated 19.08.2019. Thereafter, the notice issued to M. U. Ahmed, returned with a report ‘addressed not found’ and a prima facie case has been established against 1. Devendra Kumar Yadav of Kohima 2. M. U. Ahmed of Polasbari, Guwahati and 3. Md. Malek Astam of Dhubri Assam. Thereafter, the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cacher, issued Form No. 31(B) to Shri Devendra Kumar Yadav and in his reply he stated that one person of Mizoram called him and talked to him over phone and asked him for transportation of teak logs from Mizoram after proper verification and measurement along with up-to-date T.P. and GST, to which, he agreed and transported the same in his vehicle giving permission to his driver, Md. Malek Astam. But, during transportation, the same was intercepted on 12.08.2018 by forest officials. He also stated that he was completely unaware about the forest rules and regulations and he promised not to repeat such offence in future and requested to release the vehicle on payment of compensation, fine etc. Then the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cacher, issued Form No. 31(C) to Shri Devendra Kumar Yadav to produce the photo-copy of Insurance Certificate and Registration Certificate etc., and he produced the same, then the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cacher, issued Form No. 31(D) to 1. Shri Devendra Kumar Yadav and 2. Md. Malek Astam (driver of the vehicle), and in reply Shri Devendra Kumar Yadav stated the same thing. Thereafter, vide impugned order dated 17.01.2020, the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Cacher, has confiscated the seized timber and also confiscated the vehicle to the department under Section

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            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

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top