Release of seized vehicles is barred during ongoing confiscation proceedings, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions while balancing rights to livelihood.

JUDGMENT :

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

Both these application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are directed against the same order i.e., 16.03.2023 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Jajpur in Criminal Revision No. 11/2022. The State of Odisha is the petitioner in CRLMC No. 2301 of 2023, wherein the prayer is to quash the aforementioned order, whereby the seized vehicle was directed to be released in favour of the petitioner, Kalandi Behera. On the other hand, CRLMC No. 2639 of 2023 has been filed with prayer for a direction to the concerned authorities to implement the aforementioned order passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Jajpur.

2. The facts, relevant only to decide the present applications are that the petitioner, Kalandi Behera claims to be the registered owner of a Ashok Leyland Pick-up Van bearing Registration No.OD-34J-6406, which was seized by the Deputy Range Officer, Jajpur Road Range for being allegedly used for committing a forest offence. A forest offence case being 2(b)CC Case No. 3 of 202 has been initiated in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur. The petitioner filed an application before the learned S.D.J.M., Jajpur being Crl. Misc. Case No. 213 of 2021 arising out of the aforementioned forest case for release of the seized vehicle in his favour as per Section 457 of Cr.P.C.. The application came to be rejected by learned S.D.J.M. on the ground that confiscation proceeding in respect of the vehicle had already been initiated. The petitioner carried the matter in revision to the Court of Session. By the order impugned, learned District and Sessions Judge, despite taking note of the fact that the confiscation proceeding had already been initiated, nevertheless directed release of the vehicle relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sundarbhai Ambala Desai vs. State of Gujarat , reported in (2003) 24 OCR (SC) 444 and of a Division of this Court in the case of Ashis Ranjan Mohanty vs. State of Odisha [W.P.(C) No. 31622 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2022] as also the judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Arun Kumar Agrawal vs. State of Odisha [ CRLREV No. 52 of 2022 decided on 20.05.2022] and directed release of the vehicle imposing certain terms and conditions. It is stated that said order of the learned District and Sessions Judge has not been implemented as yet. The owner has therefore, filed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with prayer to direct the authorities to implement the order by releasing the vehicle. The State, on the other hand questions the legality and correctness of the order referring to the statutory bar under Section 56 of the Odisha Forest Act by contending that such release is not permissible in the eye of law.

3. Heard Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned State Counsel (petitioners in CRLMC No. 2301 of 2023 and representing the opposite parties in CRLMC No. 2639 of 2023) and Mr. Laxmidhar Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRLMC No. 2639 of 2023 and opposite party in CRLMC No.2301 of 2023.

4. Mr. Mishra, learned State Counsel has referred to the proviso to sub-Section(3) of Section 56 of the Odisha Forest Act, 1972 to contend that there being a bar for release of the vehicle during pendency of the confiscation proceeding, learned District Judge could not have passed the impugned order contrary to the same. He further submits that the confiscation proceeding has since concluded with direction for confiscation of the vehicle to the State and the petitioner has preferred appeal against such order in F.A.O. No. 3 of 2023 before the learned District Judge, Jajpur.

5. Per contra, Mr.