The court ruled that failure to actively participate in legal proceedings warrants vehicle confiscation, emphasizing the owner's duty to demonstrate diligence in preventing its misuse.

JUDGMENT

AMAL RANARAJA, J.

1. On June 29, 2010, officers of the Range Forest Office in Polonnaruwa have arrested the accused-respondent-respondents for illegal entry and logging of “Weera trees” within a protected forest reserve. During the arrest, the officers have also seized the lorry bearing registration number CP-LD 2482 together with a tractor trailer that were loaded with logs.

2. Thereafter, the range forest officer, Polonnaruwa, has filed the action in the Hinugurakgoda Magistrates Court against the accused-respondent- respondents for illegally logging “Weera trees” within a protected forest reserve and causing a loss to the government of Sri Lanka, an offence punishable in terms of section 20 read with section 40 of the Forest Ordinance. The accused-respondent-respondents upon pleading guilty to the charge have been convicted and sentenced.

3. Subsequently, a confiscation inquiry has been held regarding the vehicle bearing registration no. CP LD 2482. By order dated October 06,2017, the learned Magistrate has ordered the confiscation of the said vehicle. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner-appellant [hereinafter referred to as the appellant] has filed an application in revision [HCRA 01/2018] in the High Court of Polonnaruwa. The learned High Court Judge by his order dated May 14, 2020, has dismissed the revision application and affirmed the order of the learned Magistrate. The appellant also being aggrieved by the order of the High Court Judge of Polonnaruwa dated May 14, 2020, has preferred the instant appeal to this Court.

4. It is common ground that the Range Forest Officer of Polonnaruwa has instituted proceedings against the accused-respondents for illegally logging “Weera trees” valued at Rs. 24,000.00 on June 29, 2010 and thereby committing an offence punishable in terms of section 20 read with section 40 of the Forest Ordinance No.16 of 1907 (as amended).

5. Section 40 of the Forest Ordinance No. 16 of 1907 (as amended) provides;

“(1) Where any person is convicted of a forest offence –

(a) All timber of forest produce which is not the property of the State in respect of which such offence has been committed; and (b) All tools, vehicles, implements, cattle and machines used in committing such offence, Shall in addition to any other punishment specified for such offence, be confiscated by Order of the convicting Magistrate:

Provided that in any case where the owner of such tools, vehicles, implements, and machines used in the commission of such offence, is a third party, no Order of Confiscation shall be made if such owner proves to the satisfaction of the Court that he had taken all precautions to prevent the use of such tools, vehicles, implements, cattle and machines, as the case may be, for the commission of the offence.

(2) Any property forfeited to the State under subsection (1) shall-

(a) if no appeal has been preferred to the Court of Appeal against the relevant conviction, vest absolutely in the State with effect from the date on which the period prescribed for preferring an appeal against such conviction expires;

(b) if an appeal has been preferred to the Court of Appeal against the relevant conviction, vest absolutely in the State with effect from the date on which such conviction is affirmed on appeal.

In this subsection, “relevant conviction” means the conviction in consequence of which any property is forfeited to the State under subsection (1)”.

6. Section 40 of the Forest Ordinance states that upon a conviction, all timber and forest produce that have been the subject matter of the offence and vehicles used for the commission of such offence would be confiscated. If the owner of a vehicle himself was the accused in the preceding case, then the issue before a Court in a confiscation inquiry will not be complicated. However, if the owner is a third party, it would be necessary for a Court to ascertain whether the offence has been committed by a particular accused with the knowledge and the connivance of the