High Court Kerala High Court

Satheesh Kumar vs The Forest Range Officer on 8 September, 2009

Kerala High Court
Satheesh Kumar vs The Forest Range Officer on 8 September, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25402 of 2009(O)


1. SATHEESH KUMAR, S/O.SHEKARAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.GRASHIOUS KURIAKOSE

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN

 Dated :08/09/2009

 O R D E R
            S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.
          -----------------------------
            W.P.(C).No.25402   OF 2009
           --------------------------
    Dated this the 8th day of September 2009
     -------------------------------------

                     JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed against the

order passed in an interlocutory application by the

learned District Judge, Kalpatta. The petitioner

who suffered an order of confiscation of his

vehicle in proceedings initiated under the Kerala

Forest Act, preferred an appeal under Section 61(D)

of the above Act before the District Judge,

Kalpatta. The petitioner had moved for an interim

custody of that vehicle before the criminal court

in which parallel proceedings continued over the

forest offence involved and the Magistrate has

passed an order directing release of the vehicle on

furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs. 3,00,000/-.

Though the bank guarantee was furnished, it is

submitted, in revision, the Sessions Judge set

W.P.(C).No.25402 OF 2009 Page numbers

aside that order for releasing the vehicle. The

vehicle which is ordered to be confiscated is still

under the custody of the Forest Department.

2. The application moved in appeal for

releasing the vehicle was disposed vide Ext.P4

order by the learned District Judge directing the

petitioner to execute a bond for Rs.4,00,000/- with

two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kalpatta and also to

produce a bank guarantee for a sum of

Rs.4,00,000/-. A further condition was also

imposed that the vehicle should be produced before

the court or the forest officer as and when

directed. Propriety and correctness of that order

is challenged in the writ petition.

3. Special Government Pleader (Forest)

has taken notice for the respondents. Having

regard to the submissions made and the facts and

W.P.(C).No.25402 OF 2009 Page numbers

circumstances presented, I find that the conditions

imposed for releasing of the vehicle under interim

custody till disposal of the appeal are too

onerous. Value of the vehicle alone need be

considered for the purpose of fixing the security

for its release on interim custody. The direction

issued to execute the bond before the learned Chief

Judicial Magistrate is not correct. Section 61(D)

of the Forest Act contemplates of a statutory

appeal against an order of confiscation passed by

the Forest Officer. It is independent of and

distinct from, the criminal proceeding initiated in

respect of the forest offence relating to the

cutting, removal, transportation etc. of the forest

produce involving a vehicle. So much so, when an

appeal is preferred under Section 61(D) of the

Forest Act any bond is ordered its execution must

be before the appellate court in which the appeal

is presented against the confiscation order. The

learned counsel for the petitioner submits, the

W.P.(C).No.25402 OF 2009 Page numbers

value of the vehicle has been assessed at

Rs.7,00,000/- which is not disputed. In

modification of the order passed by the learned

District Judge I direct the petitioner to furnish

security for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- for interim

custody of the vehicle till the disposal of the

appeal. Petitioner is allowed to furnish a bank

guarantee for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- and the rest

by producing title deeds over immovable property,

which is free from encumbrance, having the value of

not less than Rs.4,00,000/-, towards the security

ordered. He shall also furnish an undertaking

before the court that the vehicle will be kept in

roadworthy condition and it will be produced as and

when directed by the court till the disposal of the

appeal. If any bank guarantee has been produced

before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court,

petitioner can apply for and get it back, provided

there no order had been passed by the court for its

retention and custody in connection with any other

W.P.(C).No.25402 OF 2009 Page numbers

proceeding. Writ petition is disposed as above.

4. Hand over a copy of the order to the

counsel for the petitioner.

Sd/-

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN,
JUDGE
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE

vdv