FOREST RANGE OFFICER Vs. P KRISHNAIAH NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE deceased first respondent was the owner of a lorry bearing No. AEN 3339. On 12. 4. 1993, the officials of the forest Department of Nellore District received information that the said vehicle and other lorries bearing Nosaep 5567 and ADC 3366 are used in smuggling red sander logs and they are proceeding from Venkatagiri. A check was laid at venkateswarapuram Commercial Tax Check post. Two lorries bearing Nos. AEN 3339 and AEP 5567 were noticed coming from nellore side at about 9. 00 a. m. on 12. 4. 1993. They did not stop on being required. The forest officials tried to chase them. The lorry of the first respondent has came to halt at Kavali on account of traffic jam. Thereafter, the vehicle was intercepted and it was found that though it was loaded with husk of groundnut, logs of red sander were found in it. The lorry was taken to the forest Office and panchanama was conducted. Proceedings under Section 44 (2-A) of the Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967 were initiated and through his order, dated 27. 7. 1993, the Authorised Officer, Nellore, the second petitioner herein, directed confiscation of the lorry as well as the seized stock.

(2.) THE first respondent filed Forest appeal No. 4 of 1993 before the Court of the District Judge, Nellore. During the pendency of the appeal, he died and his legal representatives being respondents 2 to 5 were brought on record. Through his order, dated 6. 8. 2001, the learned District judge allowed the appeal and directed release of the lorry. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) THE learned Government Pleader for Forests submits that the lower appellate court proceeded on totally improper lines of adjudication and directed release of the lorry, pointing out certain alleged defects in the panchanama. He contends that when it was proved beyond any doubt that the lorry was involved in smuggling of red sander and when the respondents did not even plead that the lorry was not involved, there was no basis for release of the same. It is also submitted that the respondents failed to prove that they did not have the knowledge of the use of the vehicle or that they have taken precautions to ensure that the lorry is not utilized in smuggling of red sanders.