CONSERVATOR OF FORESIS Vs. SUKUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Conservator of Forests, Southern Circle, Kollam has filed this writ petition challenging the judgment dated 20-3-2007 in C.M.A. No. 32/04 passed by the learned Additional District Judge Pathanamthitta, setting aside the confiscation order over a mini lorry, allegedly, involved in transiting of timber, under Section 61A of the Kerala Forest Act (for short "the Act").

(2.) The Respondent is the owner cum driver of the vehicle involved in the confiscation proceedings.

(3.) A forest patrolling party headed by the Deputy Ranger, during the course of night patrolling on 19-5-2004, intercepted a mini lorry loaded with anjili logs and planks, passing through Angamaly Chittar road, which was driven by the Respondent. Explanation offered by the Respondent and also the passenger in the cabin, who claimed to be owner of the logs carried, not being found satisfactory and as there was reasonable ground to suspect the commission of a forest offence in the transportation of logs and planks, the vehicle with the goods was seized into custody. Further investigation, after seizure, on registration of a case involving forest offence, disclosed that the logs carried in the vehicle were cut and removed from the land having the status of reserve forest, but assigned to persons under the food production scheme, and thus falling within 'food production area', belonging to the Government, from which prohibition from cutting anjili trees was then in force. After investigation, being satisfied that the seized anjili logs and also the planks carried in the vehicle belonged to the Government and the vehicle was used for illicit transportation of timber a report was filed before the authorised officer. On such report, the authorised officer initiated proceedings under Section 61A of the Act and issued notice to the Respondent, the owner of the vehicle, to show cause why the vehicle should not be confiscated. The Respondent and the witnesses produced by him were examined in such enquiry and their statements were recorded. The authorised officer, on the basis of the materials tendered, concluded that the vehicle was involved in the illicit transportation of timber and that such illicit transportation was with the knowledge of the owner the Respondent. The mini lorry was thereupon ordered to be confiscated. The order was subject to a review by the Conservator of Forests. Confiscation order confirmed in review by the conservator of forests was challenged by die Respondent by filing an appeal as C. M. A. No. 65/95 before the District Court, Pathanamthitta. Challenge canvassed by the Respondent owner, the Appellant in mat appeal, that he was not given an opportunity of hearing by the Conservator of Forests, when review over the confiscation order way proceeded with, appealed to the learned District Judge, and, in that view of the matter, the confiscation order was set aside and the case remitted for fresh consideration. Challenge against die remand order by way of a writ petition before this Court by me Department was unsuccessful.