DIPAK CHOWDHURY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although the appeal was initially directed against an order dated 12-9-96 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court, keeping in view the subsequent event, which had been taken note of by another Division Bench, before us now the validity or otherwise of the order dated 13-1-97 has fallen for consideration.

(2.) The appellant allegedly purchased 118 sal logs, which bore "passing hammer mark" and "sale hammer mark", in Assam and brought the same in West Bengal. All original documents in relation to the said articles were said to have been deposited with the Range Officer, Moraghat Range for the purpose of obtaining transit pass. However, the logs were seized on 22-2-96 On or about 20th February, 1996, a notice was issued by the Beat Officer, Khuntimary, directing the appellant to show cause as to why the said logs had been brought without any hammer mark and valid document. The said notice reads thus:-

(3.) The writ application was filed by the writ petitioner inter alia, questioning the jurisdiction of a Beat Officer to issue the said notice. The learned Trial Judge by reason of an order dated 12-9-96 upon taking into consideration the grievances of the petitioner, directed him to raise all contentions before the Forest Beat Officer. The learned Trial Judge further directed :