ZUBAIR ALAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the Order dated 3.4.2000 passed in Confiscation Revision No. 8 of 1998 by respondent No. 4, Secretary, Forest & Environment Department, Patna, whereby and where under the Order passed by the respondent No. 3. Deputy Commissioner, Palamau in Confiscation Appeal No. XI/22 of 1997-98 dated 1.4.1998 was set aside and the order passed by the respondent No. 2 Authorised Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Garhwa in Confiscation Case No. 1/97 dated 16.9.1997 was confirmed, by which Truck bearing No. BRO/1085 was ordered to be confiscated.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to this application is that on the basis of the report of the Forest Guard and on the recommendation of Range Officer, Chainpur, a Forest Case under Sections 33, 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act was registered against the petitioner and others and the confiscation was initiated. There was an allegation that on 10.7.1997, one Ram Pravesh Singh, the driver of the truck in question was carrying Granite about 200 CRT of worth Rs. 2,000.00 under the valued challan from M/s. Pankaj Enterprises and the Forest Guard seized the truck along with Granite, minerals and tools. Notice was issued to file show cause. The petitioner being the registered owner came to know regarding seizure of his truck and he approached the respondent No. 2, the D.F.O. for release of the truck. The petitioner did not want to contest the case and as such, he accepted his guilt and expressed his desire to make compromise, but the respondent No. 2 ignoring the fact and legal position directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 by his order dated 16.9.1997 against which the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau under Section 52A of the Indian Forest Act, which was allowed and the order passed by the respondent No. 2 (D.F.O.) was set aside. The petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 for release of the truck vide Annexure-3. Against the said order, the respondent No. 2 filed a revision before the respondent which was allowed and the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Palamau was set aside by order dated 3.4.2000, hence this application.

(3.) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent No. 2 claiming therein that the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief and there is no illegality in the impugned order. It is further alleged that the Criminal case under Section 33, 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act was already registered and the truck was seized as it was operating in a protected forest area as well as the petitioner accepted guilt and also prayed for compounding the case, on the basis of which the petitioner was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 and the Revisional Court has rightly dismissed petition and affirmed the order of Divisional Forest Officer and as such, this petition has got no merit, which is fit to be dismissed.