MUMTAZ AHMAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Because of the divergence of views expressed by two Hon'ble Judges in two different judgments on the question as to whether after amandment of Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by the Bihar Act 9 of 1990, the authorised officer or the original authority of confiscation proceeding as per provision of Section 52 of the Act, as amended, has jurisdiction to release the seized property, in respect of which confiscation proceeding is initiated, during the pendency of the confiscation proceeding, or not.

(2.) In the case of Anatnul Haque V/s. State of Bihar,1995 2 PLJR 153, Hon'ble Nagendra Rai, J., after considering the effect of Bihar Act 9 of 1990, has held in paragraph 23 of the judgment as follows:

(3.) But in a judgment dated 27-4-1995 in the case of Maqbool Ansari V/s. State of Bihar, 1995 2 EastCriC 447 Cr WJC No. 42/95 (R), Hon'ble S. K. Chattopadhyaya, J., on the other hand, has held that under various provisions of the Bihar Act 9 of 1990, read with Section 61 of the Central Act, the authorised officer dealing with the confiscation proceeding of vehicle, involved in offence under the Forest Act can release the vehicle during the pendancy of the confiscation proceeding before him.