The court established that confiscation proceedings under the Kerala Forest Act require prior notice to the owner, ensuring their right to respond before any compulsory confiscation.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS THURSDAY, THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 30TH MAGHA, 1947 CRL.MC NO. 11237 OF 2025 CRIME NO.16/2025 OF Palode Forest Range Office, Thiruvananthapuram AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2025 IN CMP NO.3937 OF

2025 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -III (FOREST OFFENCES), NEDUMANGAD PETITIONER/PETITIONER :

RAJESH, AGED 35 YEARS S/O RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KURUMAMKODE PUTHENVEEDU, ILAMBA, MUDAKKAL, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, FROM ADARSH VEEDU, 1415 CROSS, 1215 MAIN, MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE, BANGALORE LAYOTTU, KARNATAKA, PIN - 695103 BY ADVS.

SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ SHRI.SUMEEN S.

SHRI.MUHAMMED SWADIQ SHRI.ARJUN SAI KRISHNAN RESPONDENT/COUNTER PETITIONER :

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, FOREST AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695001

2 THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER, PALODE FOREST RANGE, NEDUMANGADU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695562

3 THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, (AUTHORIZED OFFICER) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIVISION, FOREST HEADQUARTERS, PTP NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695038 PP.SRI.M.P.PRASANTH, SPL.PP.SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN, PP.SRI.ARAVIND V. MATHEW THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

19.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

C.S.DIAS, J.

--------------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No. 11237 OF 2025 -----------------------------------------

Dated this the 19^th day of February, 2026

ORDER

The petitioner is the owner of a vehicle bearing registration No.KA-01-HC-8366, which has been seized by the Palode Forest Range, Thiruvananthapuram, in O.R.No.16/2025 alleging that the accused had used the vehicle to transport sandalwood, and thus, the vehicle have committed the offences punishable under Sections 47B , 47C, 47F, 47G and

47H of the Kerala Forest Act , 1961, (‘ the Act’ in short). 2. Claiming interim custody of the vehicle, the petitioner had filed an application before the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate for the Trial of Forest Offences, Nedumangad, (learned Magistrate). The Investigating Officer opposed the application by filing an objection, inter alia, contending the confiscation proceedings has been initiated under Section 61A of the Act. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh and Others v. Uday Singh and Others [2019 KHC 6345] , the learned Magistrate loses his jurisdiction to consider the application for interim custody. Based on the above objection, the learned Magistrate dismissed the application by Annexure A5 order. Annexure A5 order is palpably wrong and unsustainable in law. In fact, the respondents have not initiated the confiscation proceedings as alleged. Hence, Annexure A5 order may be set aside.

3. The 2nd respondent has filed a statement, inter alia, contending that, on 29.10.2025, acting upon credible information regarding the unauthorised possession and attempt to sell sandalwood, the above OR was registered. The contraband timber was transported utilizing the vehicle in question in contravention of Section 47 of the Act. Accordingly, the seized vehicle was produced before the Divisional Forest Officer to initiate confiscation proceedings under Section 61A of the Act. Subsequently, the procedure under Section 61B of the Act is in progress. As the confiscation proceedings is in progress, there is no error in the learned Magistrate declining interim custody. Hence, the Crl.M.C, may be dismissed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Public Prosecutor.

5.