GOPESHWAR SAHA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of learned District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala passed under sub-section (5) of S. 52-A of Indian Forest (Tripura Second Amendment) Act, 1986 upholding the order of confiscation of the vehicle (Lorry) belonging to the petitioner passed by the authorised officer (Divisional Forest Officer) in exercise of power under sub-section (2) of S. 52-A of the said Act, has been put under challenge in this writ petition.

(2.) The facts leading to the present petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India could be summarised thus ;- The vehicle bearing No. AXA-3587 belonging to the petitioner was seized by the authorised officials on 10-5-1993 while it was carrying some wooden timbers without any permit on Assam Agartala Road. The petitioner received two successive notices dated 12th and 17/07/1993 issued by the authorised officer (Divisional Forest Officer, Teliamura) requiring him to show cause as to why the said vehicle should not be confiscated as it carried 78 pieces of "illegal Gamiar Swan Timber" unauthorisedly. The petitioner furnished his reply on 24-7-1993 stating, inter alia, that the driver of the vehicle might have carried the said wooden timbers without his knowledge and consent and, as such, he claimed his vehicle to be released without resorting to confiscation proceeding. After recording the statements of the petitioner and the Forest Beat Officer who seized the vehicle with timber, the authorised officer confiscated the vehicle vide impugned order dated 3-9-1993 in exercise of his power under S. 52-A(2) of the Act. The petitioner carried futile statutory appeal under sub-section (5) of S. 52-A of the Act as mentioned above.

(3.) The State respondent contested the case by filing counter-affidavit, recitals of which go to show that the vehicle was intercepted and seized by the Forest authorised official while it was carrying contraband forest produce on Assam Agartala road. The driver and Assistant of the vehicle were apprehended but any how the driver managed to flee away. The designated authorised officer issued show cause notice, considered reply furnished by the owner and after affording opportunity of being heard passed the impugned order in exercise of statutory power. The owner failed to prove that the vehicle carried the illicit timber without his knowledge and thus the order of confiscation requires no interference.