FIROZ Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application is filed under section 482 of Cr.P.C. for setting aside the order passed by learned First Additional Judge, to the court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandleshwar (West Nimar) in Criminal Revision No.105/2014 dated 12.08.2014 by which, learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the order passed by learned JMFC, Kasrawad in Crime No.177/2014 Police Station ­ Megaon District ­ Mandleshwar dated 02.06.2014 whereby, learned Magistrate dismissed the application filed by the present applicant under section 451 of Cr.P.C. for ad interim custody of Earth Excavating Machine, commonly known as JCB Machine.

(2.) THE factual background of the case is that, on 20.05.2014 at about 8:30 pm, the machine was found being used for excavation of soil in reserve forest. The case was made out under the Indian Forest Act and while the machine and another vehicle tractor were being taken to Megaon, it is alleged that some people attacked the forest officials and, therefore, alongwith the Forest Act, a case under section 353, 332 and 506/34 of IPC was also registered. Subsequent to this, tractor and trolly seized in the matter were given on ad interim custody by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mandleshwar, however, when the application is filed for taking in custody of the present machine, the same was dismissed on the ground that Superintendent of Police wrote a letter to the District Magistrate, Khargone in which, Superintendent of Police requested the District Magistrate to confiscate the above said machine. On the presumption that confiscation proceedings of the machine has been started, the application was dismissed and subsequently, the revision is filed against this order. The First Additional Sessions Judge was disposed of the revision stating therein that under section 52(c) of the Indian Forest Act, once confiscation proceedings were started, the court has no jurisdiction to grant ad interim custody etc. used in commission of the offence.

(3.) AGAINST this order, present application is filed on the ground that the Courts below erred while holding that the confiscation proceedings in respect of the machine was started when they were dealing with the application. According to the present applicant, the proceedings can only be started by forest officer, who should not be below the rank of Extra Assistant Conservator of Forest and also is authorized by the State Government. In the present case, no intimation was issued by the Forest Officer and, therefore, the courts below erred in presuming that the confiscation proceedings were in progress. On this ground interalia, the applicant prays that the impugned orders passed by the Courts below be set aside and ad interim custody of the machine should be granted to him.