Back
K.LAKSHMAN
Lotavath Chandar Naikvs – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
The present writ petition is filed seeking a direction to declare the action of respondents in registering the case in Preliminary Offence Report (POR) No. 05/01/2021 dated 13.10.2021 booked under Section 20(1)(c)(II)(III) and (VII) of the Telangana Forest Act, 1972 and Section 51(1) of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 and under Section 2 (II) and (III) of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and for a consequential direction to the respondents to release the petitioner’s vehicle JCB bearing No.TS 05FE 0566 by compounding the case.
2. Heard Mr. Ponnam Ashok Goud, learned counsel representing Mr. N. Uma Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Forest appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. Facts of the Case:
The Petitioner claims to be the owner of a JCB vehicle bearing registration No.TS05FE0566 and chassis No.RAJ3DXSSV02885808 (hereinafter ‘subject vehicle’). He offers the subject vehicle on a rental basis and earns his livelihood. According to the Petitioner, the said subject vehicle was seized by Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 when it was rented out to one Jatavath Thara Singh, accused in POR. The main relief sought by the Petitioner is to s
Point of Law – Under the Act, 1967 only an authorised officer or the Divisional Forest Officer under Section 51 of the Act, 1967 can temporarily release any property used to commit an offence.
The court affirmed that a vehicle seized for forest offences cannot be released until all proceedings are concluded, reinforcing compliance with the Indian Forest Act.
Once confiscation proceeding has started, the criminal courts have no jurisdiction to release the seized vehicle.
Confiscation of property under wildlife laws requires a finding of guilt in a criminal trial; mere suspicion is insufficient.
Point of Law : Section 15 gives independent power to the authority concerned, but confiscation of the article as mentioned there under, even before the guilt is completely established.
The main legal point established is that the owner of a vehicle used in a forest offence may not be held responsible if they can prove lack of knowledge or connivance, as per Section 49(6) of the AFR....
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
