KULDEEP SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Singular question involved in the present writ petition is whether an accused is entitled to engage an advocate in seizure/confiscation proceedings before the Authorised Officer under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 ?

(2.) The petitioner's request for engaging an advocate in confiscation proceedings is turned down by communicating the order dated 12 th January,2012 ( Annexure P/1) which is assailed in the present petition. The petitioner submits that as per section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961 read with sections 19 and 72 of the Indian Forest Act,1927 ( for brevity 1927 Act ) the petitioner is entitled to engage an advocate even in confiscation proceedings.

(3.) Per contra, Ms Sangita Pachori, learned Government Advocate supported the impugned order and submits that the petitioner is not entitled to engage an advocate in confiscation proceedings.