STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. RAJESH GAONKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the petitioner is that a pick-up belonging to the respondent was seized on 7-11-1997 by Range Forest Officer, Mobile Squad, Margao in connection with carrying sawn timber. This wood was being unloaded near the house of one P. N. DSouza. When the Forest Officials approached near the said vehicle, the vehicle sped away along with part of sawn wood which had not been unloaded. The vehicle was seized and the wood was attached from the vehicle. Some part of the wood was also recovered from the house of the said P. N. DSouza. The case of the respondent is that the said vehicle was wrongly detained by the Department and was not involved in any forest offence.

(2.) A show cause notice was issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forests as to why the vehicle in question should not be confiscated under section 61 (A), Clause 2 of the Indian Forest Act, as amended by Goa Amendment. An application for release of the vehicle was filed before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Margao. By order dated 6-2-1998, the Magistrate came to prima facie conclusion that there is nothing on record to suggest that the material seized is not forest produce belonging to the Government and that no material has been placed to rebut the presumption under section 69 of the said Act. Accordingly, the Magistrate came to the conclusion that the Court had no jurisdiction to deal with the application for release of the vehicle. This order of the Judicial Magistrate, F. C. was challenged before the learned Sessions Judge, Margao. The learned Sessions Judge, Margao by judgment dated 31-7-1998, reversed the findings of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Margao on the ground that the Judicial Magistrate, First Class had jurisdiction to hear and deal with the application in question. The State has come in revision against this order of the learned Sessions Judge, Margao.

(3.) A short point for consideration for the purpose of disposal of the revision in question is as to which authority has jurisdiction to deal with the application in question. Section 52 (2) of the Indian Forest Act as amended by Goa Amendment Act, 1988 specifies the authorities to whom the seizure is to be reported, which reads as under :