SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT STATE OF TAMIL NADU ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT CHENNAI Vs. N VENKATESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) STATE is the petitioner herein. The judgment in C.A. No. 239 of 2002 dated 14.8.2002 passed by the second respondent, setting aside the confiscation of the vehicle involved in a forest offence is under challenge.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to the Writ Petition are as follows:

(3.) THE petitioner has further submitted that as per Section 49(B)(2) of the Act, it is the bounden duty of the owner to prove to the satisfaction of the Authorised Officer that the vehicle was used in the commission of the offence without his knowledge or connivance, his agent if any and the person, who is in charge of the vehicle and that each of them had taken all reasonable and necessary precautions against such use. THErefore, the petitioner has submitted that it is not enough, if the owner merely pleads innocence of the offence, but he has to substantiate his claim with tangible evidence. Placing reliance on a decision in W.A. No. 1296 of 1995, dated 4.12.1995, the petitioner has submitted that the burden is on the owner to prove that the vehicle is not involved in the offence and, that, he cannot escape from the liability, by merely saying that he is not involved in the offence and has no knowledge about the same.