Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR, J.
Deepak Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 4449 of 2018
Decided On : 17-05-2023
Confiscation - Indian Forest Act, 1927 - Sections 33/41/42 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, particularly Sections 33, 41, and 42, and their interpretation in the context of confiscation of vehicles carrying forest produce. The court highlighted the requirement for valid purchase documents and the onus of proof on the claimant to establish lawful acquisition of forest produce. The court's decision was influenced by the erroneous findings of the confiscating, appellate, and revisional authorities, and their failure to consider the transport challan (Form-D) dated 19.09.2014, leading to the setting aside of their orders.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's truck was confiscated for allegedly illegally transporting stone boulders from a forest area. The petitioner claimed lawful transportation with valid documents, but the confiscating and appellate authorities upheld the confiscation. The revisional authority also dismissed the petitioner's revision.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the confiscating authority erred in not considering the transport challan (Form-D) dated 19.09.2014, and the appellate and revisional authorities made erroneous observations about the validity of the challan. As a result, the court set aside the orders of the authorities and directed the release of the confiscated vehicle to the petitioner.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of the confiscation of the petitioner's truck, the consideration of valid purchase documents, and the failure of the authorities to verify the facts before making their decisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the failure of the authorities to consider the transport challan (Form-D) and their erroneous findings about the validity of the documents presented by the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the orders of the authorities, and directed the release of the confiscated vehicle to the petitioner.
ORDER :
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing order dated 24.07.2018 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) passed by the Revisional Authority-cum-Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi (the respondent no. 2) in Revision Case No. 84 of 2017 whereby the said revision preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed upholding the order dated 10.06.2017 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag-cum-Appellate Authority under Indian Forest Act, 1927 (the respondent no. 3) in Confiscation Appeal (IFA) No. 03/2015 as well as the order dated 13.02.2015 passed by the Authorised Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Hazaribag West Division, Hazaribag (the respondent no. 4) in Confiscation Case No. 32 of 2014 (G. Case No. 449 of 2014) whereby two trucks (Hywa) bearing registration nos. JH-12D-8826 (belonging to the petitioner) and JH-12E-2278 along with the loaded stone boulders have been confiscated. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 4 to forthwith release the truck (Hywa) bearing registration no. JH-12D-8826 in favour of the petitioner.
2. The brief facts as stated in the present writ petition is that an offence case bearing G(F)no.-449/2014 was instituted on an application dated 20.09.2014 given by Forest Guard- Krishna Kumar Choudhary to Forest Ranger Officer, Barhi Forest Range (the respondent no. 5) stating that on the said date, he intercepted two trucks (Hyva) bearing registration nos. JH-12D-8826 and JH-12E-2278 loaded with 500 cft. stone boulders each in ‘Dapok’ forest area. On such interception, the drivers of the said vehicles fled away and no one was present there to handover the documents or to explain anything about the loaded stone boulders on the said trucks. Accordingly, the trucks were seized with the help of the officials of Barhi Police Station and the offence report no. 1963 dated 20.09.2014 was prepared. On 13.10.2014, the respondent no. 5 submitted the prosecution report arraying the petitioner as well as two other persons as accused for the offences allegedly committed under Sections 33/41/42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (as amended vide Bihar Amendment Act, 1989).
3. The petitioner is the owner of one of the seized trucks bearing registration no.- JH-12D-8826. Subsequently, the respondent no. 4 initiated a confiscation proceeding being Confiscation Case No. 32 of 2014 (G. Case No. 449/2014) and vide order dated 13.02.2015 passed the order of confiscation of the aforesaid trucks including the truck bearing registration no. is JH-12D-8826 belonging to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner and others preferred Confiscation Appeal (IFA) No. 03 of 2015 before the respondent no. 3 which was dismissed vide order dated 10.06.2017. Aggrieved with the said orders passed by the respondent no. 4 as well as the respondent no. 3, the petitioner preferred Revision Case No. 84 of 2017 before the respondent no. 2 which was also dismissed vide order dated 24.07.2018. Hence, the present writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his truck bearing registration no. JH-12D-8826 was carrying 500 cft. stone boulders in a lawful manner and therefore, the initiation of confiscation proceeding by the respondent no. 4 was itself illegal. It is contended that while the respondent no. 4 was conducting the proceeding of Confiscation Case No. 32 of 2014, the petitioner had produced the delivery challan as well as the transport challan (Form-D) both dated 19.09.2014, however ignoring the same, the respondent no. 4 arbitrarily held that the trucks were illegally carrying stone boulders from the notified forest area pertaining to ‘Dapok’ forest and accordingly confiscated the said trucks vide impugned order dated 13.02.2015. Moreover, the appellate authority i.e., the respondent no. 3 passed the order dated 10.06.2017 in a cryptic manner merely observing that though the vehicles were se
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for authorities to consider all relevant documents, particularly transport challans, and to verify facts before making decisions....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for authorities to consider all relevant documents and verify factual claims before ordering confiscation under the Indian Fores....
Valid documentation and adherence to transport regulations prevent vehicle confiscation under the Indian Forest Act.
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....
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....
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....
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
