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

2004 Supreme(Ker) 238

G.SASIDHARAN
Mathew – Appellant
Versus
The Range Officer – Respondent


Judgment :-

Petitioner is the registered owner of Maruthi 1000 car which was taken into custody by the forest officers in connection with O.R.12/2002 of Chedelath Forest Range. An application filed by the petitioner for getting interim custody of the vehicle was dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class II, Sulthan Bathery. This petition is filed challenging the order by which the application filed by the petitioner was dismissed.

2. In the order, it is said that the Forest Range Officer objected giving vehicle to the petitioner on interim custody. The objection which was raised before the Magistrate was that the vehicle seized by the Forest Officers had become property of the Government and hence it should not be released to the Petitioner. Learned Magistrate accepted the above objection raised by the Forest Range Officer.

3. Objection raised by the Forest Range Officer was on the basis of what is said Section 39(1)(d) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act. The above provision says that vehicle vessel, weapon, trap or tool that has been used for committing an offence and has been seized under the provisions of the Act shall be the property of the Central Government. The Pr


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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top