DIVL FOREST OFFICER MANGALORE Vs. A ADRAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has come up before this Division Bench by virtue of the order of reference dated 13-1-1981 passed by my learned brother Patil,J.

(2.) A few facts necessary for determination of the questions before us may be narrated as follows: - An Ambassador Car bearing registration No. MEX 5220 was seized by the Kadaba police on 29-4-1979 and subjected to property form No. 53 of 1979 in Crime No. 44 of 1979. The seizure was made as sandal wood pellets were being conveyed in the said car and offences punishable under S. 379, IPC and Ss. 86 & 87 of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') had been committed according to the report of the police. The report of the seizure was made on 30-4-1979 before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sullia. The police requested that permission be granted to them to retain the car and the other property pending investigation The Judicial Magistrate, First Class, granted permission on 30-4-1979. Prior to 28-5-1979, seizure of the very car was reported to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mangalore, and the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mangalore, passed an order that the car should be produced before a officer authorised by the State Government with, the powers of confiscation under" the Act as requested by the police and the same was produced and an acknowledgment received, before the District Forest Officer, Mangalore, on 28-5-1979. Thereafter, the respondent who has remained absent though served with the copies of the criminal petition, filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sullia, i.e., on 24-5-1979 praying that the vehicle be released in his favour as he was entitled to possession thereof being the registered owner of the car. The Magistrate called for the report of the Circle Inspector of Police, heard the Assistant Public Prosecutor and passed his order dated 10-7-79 directing the release of the car in favour of the respondent.

(3.) The State preferred Crl.R.P. No. 68 of 1979 in the Court of the Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangalore, as against the said order of the Magistrate. It may be stated that all these facts are available in that order as well as the order of the Magistrate. The learned Sessions Judge concluded that the order passed by the Magistrate was an interlocutory order and therefore a revision was incompetent and that the order passed by the Magistrate was in accordance with law in view of the decision reported in State of Karnataka v. Shivannnda (1977) 2 Kar.L.J. 452.