. …u-um ur mnnwnlnm-\ I-man Luulif KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR
4 WP9890.06
rimming counter to the provisions of mtion 7 of the
Act and the a$rming order of the learned
having not evinced any awareiiess to”
matter, both orders are --: quashed.
6. Notice had oi)jectioI1s had
been filed by the Muthaxma,
learned A appears and
: V i
7. indicate that it is a fact that
the lofty, commission. of a forest offence.
IE6 E ixivoivement of the vehicle i.e., mrriage of
-goods automatically attracts penalty of
i’ on the carrier. Though opportunity is
to the owner to make good his case that he was
” innocent or that the ofienee had taken place
without his knowledge or connivanee, I do not find that
this aspect has been made good by the petitioner in the
present case. %/i
. ……… III su-uu1.Hl;Hl\.l’-\ mun Ieuuig KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KAHHAMIOK HIGH COUR
5 WP9390.06
8. A perusal of the order and the to
which attention is drawn by leamed» .. rsr«
petmoner only mdwates ‘: 4_tfhe4re 4]
possibility of the iravoivezflept 61′ dIi’:ei’ ti1e’.'(m:7:is:er,
it has not been positively; 1 )fe1:1’tioner that
there is no such u the burden
having good his case of
bjuiéen having not been
iffi ‘autiiozities have come to the
co1;c.1§.1si:e11V has not proved his non-
involveitiena ” find any error or illegality for
‘Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
._ is dismissed.
Sd/-
Judge