STATE OF M P Vs. ADITYA NARAYAN SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With consent, matter is finally heard. This is a petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 30-9-2011 passed by Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa in Cri. Revision No. 139/11, setting aside the order passed on 6-7-2010 by the Empowered Officer, viz., Conservator of Forests, Khandwa, whereby the order dated 28-4-2008 passed by Licensing Officer, so far as it related to release of saw-mill machinery, seized for violation of sub-section (5)(c) of Section 6 and Section 9 of M.P. Kashtha Chiran (Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1984 (for short 'the Adhiniyam'), was annulled and the same was directed to be confiscated.

(2.) As indicated already, the impugned order was passed in a case, registered as Criminal Revision whereas a bare perusal thereof would reveal that it was treated to be criminal appeal. However, fact of the matter is that the order of confiscation was passed by the Empowered Officer, in exercise of suo motu power, conferred by sub-section (3) of Section 12 of the Adhiniyam, and the same could be challenged by preferring an appeal (not a revision) under sub-section (4) thereof before the District Court (not the Court of Session), within local limits of whose jurisdiction the area wherein property has been seized is situated. Needless to say that the 'District Court' means a Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction [See: Clause (4) of Section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure].

(3.) Thus, the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 12 of the Adhiniyam are not in pari materia with sub-section (2) of Section 52A and sub-section (1) of Section 52B of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, as applicable to the State of Madhya Pradesh. For a ready reference, these provisions may be reproduced as under:--