The court emphasized the necessity for substantial evidence in confiscation proceedings, addressing procedural lapses and the implications of prolonged property retention.

JUDGMENT :

Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. The Petitioner/ State in the Writ Petition prays for quashing of the order dated 02.12.2010 passed by the learned District Judge, Cuttack in FAO No.46 of 2009 and for reinstatement of the confiscation ordered on 04.02.2009, along with any other appropriate relief.

2. The Petitioner (Niranjan Nayak) has filed the CONTC for non- compliance of the order dated 02.12.2010 passed by the learned District Judge, Cuttack in FAO No.46 of 2009 by the Opposite Party/ Contemnor.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(i) On the morning of the 29.05.2007 at around 8:00 AM, the Range Officer of Khuntuni Forest Range received reliable intelligence that a white D.I. Pick-up vehicle without a number plate was being used to illegally transport timber along National Highway-42, traveling from Dhenkanal to Cuttack.

(ii) Acting on the information, forest officials set up a checkpoint at Jharan Nursery in an attempt to intercept the vehicle. However, upon noticing the officials, the driver of the suspected vehicle sped away, evading the initial interception.

(iii) A chase ensued along NH-42. At Bali Chhak, a group of individuals led by a known timber smuggler named Ranjan Majhi intervened. They Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 23-Apr-2025 18:11:49 reportedly escorted the fleeing vehicle and obstructed the forest officials from continuing the chase.

(iv) The group, allegedly associated with the smuggling operation, attacked the forest and police personnel using stones, iron rods, and lathis. As a result, several officials were injured, and the official vehicle used by the Range Officer was damaged during the confrontation.

(v) Following the attack, the Choudwar Police Station intervened promptly. They rescued the injured forest staff and subsequently registered Police Station Case No. 92/2007 to investigate the assault and the illegal timber transport.

(vi) On 04.02.2009, the Authorised Officer passed an order directing the confiscation of both the vehicle and the sal logs to the State Government. The decision was based on the driver’s confession, the owner’s alleged complicity, and the assumption that the vehicle had been used for transporting forest produce illegally.

(vii) Aggrieved by the confiscation order, Niranjan Nayak (Opp. Party) filed an appeal designated as F.A.O. No. 46 of 2009 before the District Judge, Cuttack. On 02.12.2010, the District Judge issued an order, reversing the confiscation. The judge noted several legal and evidentiary deficiencies in the original proceeding and directed that the vehicle be released to its registered owner, Niranjan Nayak.

II. FINDINGS OF LOWER COURT

4. The District Judge, Cuttack passed an order on 02.12.2010. The findings of the Court is produced below:

(i) The appellant had admitted to being the owner of the TATA DI vehicle bearing registration number OR-05Y-3713. However, mere ownership was not enough to hold him liable unless a direct connection was established between the vehicle and the alleged forest offence.

(ii) The Forest Department did not establish a clear and convincing link between the seized vehicle and the illegal transportation of forest produce. It was observed that the timber in question was not found in the vehicle at the time of seizure. Instead, it was recovered from an open area in village Kochila Nuagaon. This raised significant doubt as to whether the vehicle was actually involved in the commission of the forest offence.

(iii) The Forest Range Officer (P.W.4), who was