LAWS(RAJ)-1992-11-55

BHEMJI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

Decided On November 11, 1992
BHEMJI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This miscellaneous petition is directed against the order dated June 16, 1992, passed by the Sessions Judge, Doongarpur, by which the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Sections 41 and 42 of the Forest Act in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sagwara, in Criminal Case No. 275 of 1992. On May 15, 1992, at about 5 30 a.m. near Sagwara Hospital, one truck bearing No. RSY 1047 was checked by the police and at that time it was found carrying 244 sleepers of sandle (Sagwan) wood. These 244 sleepers were seized by the police and the case was registered against the accused-petitioner, who was the owner thereof. After the seizure of the wood, the petitioner moved an application for the custody of the wood. That application was dismissed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sagwara, by his order dated May 22, 1992. Dissatisfied with the order dated May 22, 1992, the petitioner preferred a revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Doongarpur, who, by his order dated May 16, 1992, dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioner on the ground that the revision petition is not maintainable. The petitioner has. therefore, preferred this miscellaneous petition under Sec. 482 Criminal Procedure Code against the order dated May 22, 1992, passed by the learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Sagwara.

(3.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that 244 sleepers of Sandie wood were seized from the truck which were carried by a transit pass and if the wood be allowed to remain in the Court premises or in the custody of the police, the sleepers will be damaged and the petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and, therefore, it will be in the interest of justice that these Sagwan sleepers may be given to the petitioner on the conditions which the Court may think proper.