BALDEO YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition the pettioner has questioned the validity of the order of the divisonal Forest Officer, Hazaribagh, in confiscation case no. 3 of 1995 and the appellate order of the District magistrate, Bokaro, in- Case No. 12 of 1995, as contained in annexures 3 and 4, whereby the vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration no. BRY 8093 has been confiscated. By the said orders, the forest produce kept on the vehicle has also been confiscated. However, as the petitioner claims to be owner of only vehicle his grievance is confined to the confiscation of the vehicle alone. The point urged is that the vehicle (and the goods) have been confiscated under section 52 of the Indian forest Act, 1927, but in view of the provisions of section 32 of the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 (in short 'the Regulation of Trade Act') the provisions of the Forest Act are not applicable and, therefore, the impugned confiscation proceeding and the order passed therein must be held to be without jurisdiction. Section 32 (1) provides :-

(2.) IT has been pointed out that shisham (Dalbergai sissoo) is specified timber vide entry 1 (vi) of the schedule to the regulation of Trade Act. The contention of the counsel is that the provisions of the forest Act are totally inapplicable to all specified forest produce described under various entries in the aforesaid schedule. In support of the contention reliance has been placed on a Bench decision of this Court in the case of Kedar Sao and anr. v. State of bihar 1995 (1) Eastern Criminal Cases, 328. It has been brought to my notice by the counsel for the State that the operation of the aforesaid judgment of this Court has been stayed by thesupreme Court in S. L. R (Cr.) Nos. 3651 and 3734 of 1994. He urged that the petitioner can not take advantage of the aforesaid judgment on account of the interim order of the Supreme Court.

(3.) THE point for consideration is whether in view of the provisions of section 32 of the Regulation of Trade Act the provisions relating to confiscation as contained in the forest Act are inapplicable to specified forest produce mentioned in its schedule.