PUSHAP RAJ Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Truck No. HP-32-0341 belonging to the petitioner (the petitioner is its registered owner) and also being driven by the petitioner at the relevant time was seized on 5th June, 2000 purportedly in terms of S. 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927. As a sequel to the seizure of this truck and as a prelude to its confiscation u/S. 52-A of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Himachal Pradesh State Amendment), as required under S. 52-B of the said Act (Himachal Pradesh State Amendment), a notice was issued to the petitioner by the Authorised Officer, text whereof is reproduced herein-below for our ready reference :-

(2.) It is not denied by the petitioner that this notice was received by him but the petitioner's contention is that the notice was not legal and valid inasmuch as it was not in conformity with the requirements of law as contained and prescribed in Ss. 52-A and 52-B (supra). The proceedings were initiated by the Authorised Officer consequent upon the receipt of the aforesaid notice by the petitioner and even though the petitioner did not file any reply thereto, evidence was recorded and the Authorised Officer passed the order of confiscation on 25th February, 2005 which was challenged by the petitioner before the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi who vide his judgment dated 5th August, 2005 dismissed the petitioner's appeal against the aforesaid order dated 25th February, 2005. The petitioner has come up to this Court invoking this Court's jurisdiction under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the aforesaid order.

(3.) Section 52-A of the Act reads thus :-