HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4394/2021

Mukesh Kumar Son Of Laduram @ Ladduram, Aged About 35

Years, Resident Of Ward No. 45, Saidabad, Police Station Sadar,

District Tonk (Raj).

----Petitioner

Versus

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Khurshid Ahmed Khan, Adv.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Shyam Prakash Sharma, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

05/05/2022

The petitioner has assailed impugned order dated

22.07.2021 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention Of

Atrocities) Cases, Tonk in Criminal Revision Case No. 49/2021,

C.I.S. No.49/2021, whereby revision petition preferred by the

petitioner was dismissed. The revision petition was preferred

against the order dated 06.07.2021 passed by learned Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tonk, District Tonk who dismissed the

application filed by petitioner for giving Mahindra Tractor No.RJ-

26-RB-6683 with trolley of petitioner on Supurdagi which was

seized in the garb of FIR No.73/68 registered by Forest Divisional

Officer.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is registered owner of Mahindra Tractor No.RJ-26-RB-

6683 with trolley. He submitted an application under the

provisions of Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 for release of the

(2 of 4)

[CRLMP-4394/2021]

Mahindra Tractor with trolley, in question, on ’Supurdginama’ but

instead of passing an order on interim custody of vehicle learned

trial Court, passed an order dated 06.07.2021 with regard to

confiscation of the Mahindra Tractor with trolley. This order was

affirmed by learned Revisional Court without mentioning a word

about the prayer of interim custody of the petitioner and did not

consider the matter in crux and he also passed the impugned

order as if the matter before him was with regard to confiscation

of the Mahindra Tractor with trolley.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well

as learned Public Prosecutor and gone through all the material

available on record.

Under provisions of Section 53 Rajasthan Forest Act,

1953 the seized vehicle can be released on execution by the

owner thereof a bond for production of the same when and where

directed to produce it, whereas provisions relating to proceedings

of the confiscation have been enshrined in Section 52A to C of the

Act of 1953.

Section 55 of the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 reads as

follows :-

“55. Forest Produce, tools etc. when liable to

confiscation.- (1) All timber or forest produce which is not the

property of State Government and in respect of which a forest

offence has been committed, and all machinery, arms, tools,

boats, cattle, vehicle, ropes, chains or any other article used in

committing any forest offence, shall, subject to the provisions

of Section 52, 52A, 52B and 52C be liable to confiscation upon

conviction of the offender for such forest offence.] (2) Such

confiscation may be in addition to any other punishment

prescribed for such offence.”

On conjoint reading of all the relevant provisions of the

(3 of 4)

[CRLMP-4394/2021]

Rajasthan Forest Act, it is clear that the vehicle used for

transportation of forest produce without valid permit can be very

much seized by the concerned forest officer and the same can be

confiscated as well but confiscation can be ordered only after

conviction of the offender for such forest offence subject to the

procedure laid down under Section 52A-C. In the instant matter,

learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted at bar that trial

for the alleged Forest Act has yet not been concluded and nobody

has been convicted. In view of Section 55 of Rajasthan Forest Act,

1953 and the submission made before me at bar, the impugned

order dated 22.07.2021 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST

(Prevention Of Atrocities) Cases, Tonk un