STATE Vs. SANTOSH SAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed against an order dated 15-1-90 passed in C. O. 12330(W) of 1989 by a learned single Judge of this Court allowing the writ application of the respondent-writ-petitioner and directing return of the seized goods to the respondent-writ-petitioner forthwith.

(2.) In coming to the said conclusion the learned Judge has noticed that the procedures prescribed had not been complied with by the forest authorities in effecting the seizure or confiscation. The learned Judge also held that the search was not conducted in accordance with the rules, inasmuch as, signature of any independent witness was not taken in the seizure memo. The provisions of Rule 8(1) of the West Bengal Forest Produce Transit Rules have also not been complied with insofar as no notice was issued to the owner nor a copy of the seizure list was furnished to him.

(3.) The more important fact noticed by the learned trial Judge was the discrepancy between the search warrant and other documents whereby the premises were searched and forest produce seized.