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

1984 Supreme(Ori) 46

G.B.PATTANAIK
SARAT KUMAR MALU – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA – Respondent


JUDGEMENT

The petitioner, registered owner of truck No. ORX 8589, challenges the legality of the order of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khurda, dated 24-8-1983 whereunder the learned Magistrate has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for release of the truck. The truck in question was seized by the officials of the forest department on 24-6-1983 on the allegation that certain teak logs were stealthily being removed in the said vehicle and thereby an offence under the Orissa Forest Act (14 of 1972) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is said to have been committed and the vehicle in question was used in committing such offence. The petitioner filed an application in the court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate on the ground that he is the registered owner of the vehicle and had absolutely no knowledge about carrying of any teak logs in the vehicle and in the interests of justice, the truck should be released in his favour. By the impugned order, the learned Magistrate has rejected the said petition on the ground that specific provisions haying been made in the Act, the jurisdiction of the criminal Courts must be held to be excluded.

2. The learned counsel for the p




















































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