1. Truck No. HP-32-0341 belonging to the petitioner (the petitioner is its registered owner) and also being driven by the petitioner at the relevant time was seized on 5th June, 2000 purportedly in terms of S. 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. As a sequel to the seizure of this truck and as a prelude to its confiscation u/S. 52-A of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Himachal Pradesh State Amendment), as required under S. 52-B of the said Act (Himachal Pradesh State Amendment), a notice was issued to the petitioner by the Authorised Officer, text whereof is reproduced herein-below for our ready reference :— "Shri Pushap Raj S/o. Shri Naginder Singh, Village Chachiot, P. O. Shalla Tehsil Chachiot, District Mandi, (HP) (Through S. H. O., Gohar). Whereas, it has been reported that truck No. HP-32-0341 owned by you has been apprehended indulging in transportation of different sizes of Deodar 20 sleepers and four frames on 5-6-2000. You are, therefore, directed through this notice to show cause as to why the said truck No. HP-32-0341 along with Deodar 20 sleepers and 4 frames are not confiscated to the State of H. P. Your reply must reach in the Court of the undersigned on 19-6-2000 at 10.00 a.m. i.e. on the date of the hearing of the case failing which it shall be presumed that you have nothing to say and exparte proceedings will be taken."

2. It is not denied by the petitioner that this notice was received by him but the petitioners contention is that the notice was not legal and valid inasmuch as it was not in conformity with the requirements of law as contained and prescribed in Ss. 52-A and 52-B (supra). The proceedings were initiated by the Authorised Officer consequent upon the receipt of the aforesaid notice by the petitioner and even though the petitioner did not file any reply thereto, evidence was recorded and the Authorised Officer passed the order of confiscation on 25th February, 2005 which was challenged by the petitioner before the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi who vide his judgment dated 5th August, 2005 dismissed the petitioners appeal against the aforesaid order dated 25th February, 2005. The petitioner has come up to this Court invoking this Courts jurisdiction under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the aforesaid order.

3. Section 52-A of the Act reads thus :— "52-A. Confiscation by Forest Officers in certain cases.— (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, where a forest-offence is believed to have been committed in respect of timber (excluding v fuelwood), resin, khair wood and katha, which is the property of the State Government, the Officer seizing the property under sub-section (1) of Section 52 without any unreasonable delay produce it, together with all tools, ropes chains, boats or vehicles used in committing such offence before an Officer, authorise^, by the State Government in this behalf, by notification published in the Official Gazette, not below the rank of an Assistant Conservator of Forests (hereinafter referred to as the authorised officer). (2) Where an authorized officer seizes under sub-section (1) of Section 52 any timber (excluding fuelwood) resin, khair wood and katha, which is the property of the State Government, or where any such property is produced before an authorized officer under sub-section (1), once he is satisfied that a forest-offence has been committed in respect of such property, such authorized officer may, whether or not a prosecution is instituted for the commission of such offence, order confiscation of the property so seized together with all tools, ropes, chains, boats or vehicles used in committing such offence. (3) (a) Where the authorized officer, after passing an order of confiscation under subsection (2), is of the opinion that it is expedient in the public interest so to do, he may order confiscated property or any part thereof to be sold by public auction. (b) Where any confiscated property is sold as aforesaid, the proceeds thereof,