The main legal point established is that under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953, the forest official has the authority to register an FIR regarding forest offences and forward it to the Magistrate for further action.

VIJAY BISHNOI, J.

1. This criminal misc. petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 have been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the action of the Regional Forest Officer, Forest Department, Barmer of forwarding an information to the Judicial Magistrate, Barmer regarding the seizure of forest produce and tools seized by him on 15.5.2014, 10.6.2014 and 17.6.2014, alleging that the petitioner was involved in the commission of offence in respect of the forest produce.

2. The petitioner, present in person, has argued that as a matter of fact, there is no provision under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1953) or the Rules made there under to register an FIR regarding commission of crime under the Act of 1953 or under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1980). The petitioner has further argued that such FIRs registered by the forest official itself is illegal and, therefore, the action of the Regional Forest Officer, Forest Department, Barmer to send the impugned FIRs to the Judicial Magistrate is also illegal. It is thus prayed that the impugned FIRs No.23/2009 (dated 15.5.2014), No.23/2011 (dated 17.6.2014) and No.23/2010 (dated 10.6.2014) registered by the Regional Forest Officer, Barmer may kindly be quashed.

3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made by the petitioner and argued that the impugned FIRs are nothing but an information sent to the concerned Judicial Magistrate, wherein, description of seized property has been given. It is contended that as per sub-section (2) of Section 52 of the Act of 1953, where it is needed to launch criminal proceedings against an offender, the forest official has to make a report of such seizure to the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence on account of which the seizure has been made and pursuant to the said provision, the impugned FIRs have been forwarded to the concerned Magistrate.

4. Heard the petitioner, present in person, learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned FIRs.

5. In the impugned FIRs, the forest official has given information regarding the seized forest produce and tools and has named the offender and has also given description of the offences under the Act of 1953 and the Act of 1980. As per sub-section (2) of Section 52 of the Act of 1953, where it is needed to launch criminal proceedings against an offender immediately, the forest official has to make a report of such seizure to the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence.

6. In the present case also, the forest official vide impugned FIRs has given a report to the concerned Magistrate regarding the commission of offence by the petitioner under the provisions of the Act of 1953 and the Act of 1980. This Court is of the opinion that the action of the Regional Forest Officer, Barmer cannot be said to be illegal in any manner.

7. Hence, no case for quashing the impugned FIRs is made out.

8. Accordingly, these criminal misc. petitions are hereby dismissed. Stay petitions are also stand dismissed.