1
W.P.No.5512/10
State of M.P. & others Sukratlal Chakravarty
10.5.2010
` Shri Rahul Jain, Dy.Advocate General for petitioners.
This petition is directed against an order dated 8.2.2010 passed
by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Criminal Revision
No.272/09 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge reversed
the order passed in appeal by the Chief Conservator of Forest dated
26.8.2009. The Chief Conservator of Forest had affirmed the order
passed by the Divisional Forest Officer-cum-competent authority,
Mandla dated 30.8.2008 directing forfeiture of the tractor and trolley of
respondent.
Learned counsel for State assailed the order on the grounds
that the forest goods were found in the vehicle and the Divisional
Forest Officer had rightly directed forfeiture of the tractor and trolley
and the Chief Conservator of Forest had rightly affirmed the aforesaid
order, but the Additional Sessions Judge has not considered the
findings recorded by the authorities while reversing the order.
From the perusal of the impugned order and material on record,
we find that respondent was transporting his household goods by
tractor and trolley and alongwith household goods, 5 teak door-frames
were found. As aforesaid door-frames were found in the vehicle,
tractor and trolley both were seized by the forest authorities and
thereafter confiscation proceedings were initiated under Section 15(5)
of the M.P. Van Upaj (Vyapar Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1969. The
Additional Sessions Judge by the impugned order found that the
aforesaid door-frames were finished wood and the respondent was
transporting these door-frames alongwith the household goods and
for finished product, provisions of aforesaid Act were not applicable.
The State could not produce any material before the Additional
Sessions Judge that the transportation of the aforesaid finished wood
alongwith the household goods were not permissible under the
aforesaid Act.
2
W.P.No.5512/10
State of M.P. & others Sukratlal Chakravarty
10.5.2010
In view of aforesaid, no error is found in the impugned order
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge allowing the revision filed by
the respondent and quashing the confiscation order passed by the
aforesaid authorities. This petition is found without merit and
dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (G.S.Solanki)
Judge Judge
C.