Judgment A.N.Chaturvedi, J. 1. This writ petion under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the sole petitioner challenging the confiscation proceeding (Confiscation Case No. 2 of 1993) initiated by respondent No. 2 for confiscation of truck No. BRM 9615. 2. It is not disputed that the said truck is a public carrier. The truck was seized on 27-3-1993 at Hunterganj by respondent No. 3. The truck was, found loaded with Harre, Gum and Katha Biscuits. Thereafter, respondent No. 2, Divisional Forest Officer, Chatra North Forest Division under his letter No. 834 dated 16-4-1993 and letter No. 850, dated 29-4-1993 directed the petitioner to show cause as to why the truck be not confiscated. Copies of the said letters (notice) are annexures 3 and 4 to the writ petition. The petitioner is said to have filed a petition before respondent No. 2 for copies of certain paper which according to him had not been supplied to him till the filing of the writ petition. The petitioner is also said to have filed an application for release of the truck but no order was passed with regard thereto by respondent No. 2 and thereafter this writ petition for quashing the entire confiscation proceeding was filed by the petitioner. 3. It was asserted on behalf of the petitioner that he has no concern either with the purchase or possession of the articles seized from the truck rather the same were being transported by the employee of the petitioner under a bona fide belief that the owner of the seized articles had engaged the truck for transportation of the articles acquired in legal manner, Apart from the defence on the facts, it was also asserted on behalf of the pettioner that there being no provision for confiscation of a vehicle under the provisions of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984, the initiation of the proceeding was wholly without jurisdiction. 4. It may be relevant to state here that immediately after the seizure of the truck the driver and khalashi of the truck, and two owners of the articles were arrested and the seizure was reported to the C. J. M., Chatra on 27-3-1993. 4. It may be relevant to state here that immediately after the seizure of the truck the driver and khalashi of the truck, and two owners of the articles were arrested and the seizure was reported to the C. J. M., Chatra on 27-3-1993. Though in the show cause notice (annexures 3 and 4) it has not been mentioned as to under which provision of which Act the confiscation proceeding has been initiated but it was not disputed by the learned counsel for the State that the proceeding has been initiated under the relevant provisions of the Forest Act. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the initiation of confiscation proceeding on the ground that the articles seized from the truck are Harre, Gum and Katha Biscuits which are enlisted in the schedule of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act and as such the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act will apply and Section 32 (1) of this Act debars the application of Indian Forest Act, 1972. It was further contended that since there is no provision for initiation of confiscation proceeding regarding a vehicle by respondent No. 2 under the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984, the entire confiscation proceeding is without jurisdiction and is fit to be quashed. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on behali of the respondents submitted that since there is no provision for initiating a confiscation proceeding under Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, the provisions of the Forest Act in this regard would apply and so the confiscation proceeding cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. It was also contended on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner being not the owner of the truck has no locus standi to maintain this writ petition. 7. The petitioner has brought on record copy of an agreement dated 6-3-1992 (annexure-1) for the purpose of showing that he has taken possession of the truck in question from one Mohan Lal Vaidya for the amount mentioned therein and as per agreement the amount is to be paid in instalments and after payment of the entire amount the ownership is to be transferred to him and as per terms and conditions he is liable if the truck is involved in any case. Referring to Section 2 (xxx) of the Motor Vehicles Act it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the person in possession of the vehicle will be deemed to be the owner thereof. In para 13 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 it has been admitted that Mohan Lal Vaidya, in response to the notice given to him, has stated that the vehicle was in possession of the petitioner and he is liable and responsible in respect thereof as per terms and conditions of the agreement. The fact that the petitioner had been noticed to show cause by respondent No. 2 is also not disputed rather this fact is apparent from the notices (annexures 3 and 4) sent to the petitioner. In view of the above facts there appears no merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents that the petitioner had no locus standi to maintain this writ petition. 8. For proper appreciation of the rival contentions raised on behalf of the parties with regard to the legal position of the confiscation proceeding it seems necessary to refer to certain provisions of the legislatures, regulating the transaction of seized articles. The Indian Forest Act, 1927 is a pre-existing Central Law which was enacted to consolidate the law relating to forest, transit of forest produce etc. "Forest produce" has been defined under Section 2 (4) of the Indian Forest Act as follows : 2(4) "forest produce" includes, (a) the following whether found in, or brought from, a forest or not, that is to say : timber, charcoal, caouthouc, catechu, wood oil resin, natural varnish, bark, lac mahua flower rnahua seeds, kuth and myrabolams, and (b) the following when found in, or brought from, a forest, that is to say : (i) trees and leaves, flowers and fruits, and all other parts or produce not herein before mentioned, of trees, (ii) plants not being trees (including grass, creepers, reeds and moss) and all parts or produce of such plaints, (iii) wild animals and skins, tusks, horns, bones, silk, cocoons, honey and w ax and all other parts or produce of animala and, (iv) peat, surface soil, lock, and minerals (including limestone, laterite, mineral oils, and all products of mines or quarries) ; 9. From the definition of "forest produce" as quoted above it is clear that the same includes the articles seized from the truck. 10. The Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act has been enacted by the State Legislature in order to make provision, for regulating the trade and other related matters of certain forest prodnce by creation of State monopoly in such trade in the State of Bihar. Section 2(4) of this Act has defined the "forest produce" as follows : "forest produce" means any forest product as specified in the schedule (hereinafter called the specified forest produce). A perusal of the schedule referred to in Section 2(4) of that Act shows that the articles (Harre, Gum and Katha lac) are mentioned therein hence are in the category of "specified forest produce". Section 5 of the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 places restrictions on the purchase or transport of specified forest produce which runs as under : Section 5. Restriction on purchase or transport of specified forest produce.(1) On the issue of the notification under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 1 with respect to any area, no person other than (i) The Government ; (ii) An Officer of the Government authorised in writing in this behalf ; (iii) An agent in respect of the unit in which the specified forest produce is grown or found ; shall purchase or transport or import or export such specified forest produce in and from such area. Explanation 7. Purchase of specified forest produce from the State Government or the af oresaid Government Officer or agent or a licensed vendor shall not be deemed to be a purchase in contravention of this Act. Explanation II.A person having no interest in the holding who has acquired the right to collect the specified forest produce grown or found on land shall be deemed to have purchased such produce in contravention of the provisions of this Act. Explanation II.A person having no interest in the holding who has acquired the right to collect the specified forest produce grown or found on land shall be deemed to have purchased such produce in contravention of the provisions of this Act. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) (i) a primary collection of a specified forest produce may transport this specified forest produce from any place within the unit wherein such specified forest produce is grown or is found to any other place in that unit; (ii) any person may transport the specified forest produce not exceeding the quantity as may be prescribed, from the place of purchase of such produce to the place where such produce is required for his bona fide use or for consumption ; (iii) specified forest produce purchased from the Government or any officer or Agent specified in the said sub-section by any person for industrial purposes or manufacture of goods within the State in which such specified forest produce is used, as raw material or by person for sale or consumption outside the State or for import in the State or transport through this State or by the licensed vendor may be transported by such person in accordance with the terms and conditions of a permit to be issued in that behalf by such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed ; and (iv) any person having the right in any forest in respect of any specified forest produce under any law for the time being in force, may transport such produce for his domestic use or consumption in such quantity and subject to such terms and conditions as may be prescribed. (3) Any person desiring to sell the specified forest produce may sell them to the aforesaid Government Officer or Agent at any depot situated within the said unit ; Provided that the Government, the Government Officer, or Agent shall not be bound to repurchase the specified produce once sold. 11. Form the aforesaid provisions it is clear that from the date of commencement of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 (on the issuance of notification under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 1 with respect to any area), the purchase, transport, import and export has been restricted subject to the provisions of the Act. 11. Form the aforesaid provisions it is clear that from the date of commencement of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 (on the issuance of notification under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 1 with respect to any area), the purchase, transport, import and export has been restricted subject to the provisions of the Act. Therefore, the said Act has been enacted to provide for State monopoly in purchase, transport, import and export of specified forest produce in the State of Bihar. Section 32 of the said Act provides that nothing contained in the Indian Forest Act, 1927 shall apply to specified forest produce in respect of matters for which the provisions are contained in this Act. The said section also provides that nothing contained in any other thing having force of law in any region of the State shall apply to the specified forest produce in respect of the matters for which provisions have been made in this Act. In view of the provisions of Section 32 of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 the general provisions prescribed under the Indian Forest Act with regard to trade and other related matters concerning forest produce will not apply to specified forest produce. For ascertaining any contravention in respect of the transaction in specified forest produce one has to refer to the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act and if any violation is found then the offence will be under the Bihar Forest (Regulation of Trade) Act. 1984 and not under the Indian Fofest Act. 12. In the instant case the Divisional Forest Officer has initiated the confiscation proceeding purporting to be in exercise of his power under Section 52 (3) of the Forest Act as substituted by the Bihar Amendment Act. Section 52 (3) reads as under. Section 52 (3)Bihar Amendment Act 9 of 1990Subject to sub-section (5), where the authorised officer upon production before him of property seized or upon receipt of report about seizure, as the case may be, is satisfied that a forest offence has been committed in respect thereof, he may by order in writing and for reasons to be recorded, confiscate forest produce so seized together with all tools, arms boats, vehicles, ropes chains or any other article used in committing such offence. The Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence concerned may, on the basis of the report of the authorised confiscating officer, cancel the registration of a vehicle used in committing the offence, the license of the vehicle driver and the licence of the arms. A copy of order on confiscation shall be forwarded without undue delay to the Conservators of Forests of the forest circle in which the forest produce, as the case may be, has been seized. 13. A reading of section shows that the forest offic r can pass an order for confiscation in respect of forest produce and the vehicle if he is satisfied that forest offence has been committed in respect of forest produce "Forest offence" has been defined under clause 3 of Section 2 of the Indian Forest Act to mean an offence punishable under that Act or under any rule made thereunder. It has already been pointed out above that any violation in respect of transaction of "specified forest produce" can amount to offence only under the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 and therefore, in respect of specified forest produce there cannot be a forest offence within the meaning of the Forest Act so as to confer any jurisdiction on an officer authorised under the Forest Act to canfiscate either specified forest produce or vehicle connected herewith. 14. Now it has to be ascertained if Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 has made any provisions for confiscation of vehicle by the respondent No. 2 or not. For ascertainment of this legal issue one has to look to Sections 15, 19 and 20 of the Act which are quoted hereunder : Section 15. Power to entry, search, seizure, etc. For ascertainment of this legal issue one has to look to Sections 15, 19 and 20 of the Act which are quoted hereunder : Section 15. Power to entry, search, seizure, etc. (1) Any Forest Officer below the rank of a Range Officer of Forest or Police Officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector, or any other person authorised by the Government in this behalf may with a view to securing compliance with the provision of this Act or the rule made thereunder, or to satisfying himself that the said provisions have been complied with (i) stop and search any person, boat, vehicle or receptacle used or intended to be used for the transport of specified forest produce ; (ii) enter and search any place ; (iii) seize the specified forest produce in respect of which he suspects that any provision of this Act or the made thereunder has been, is being or is about to be contravened along with the recetacles containing such produce and all tools, rapes, chains, boats or/and vehicles used in committing any such offence. (2) The provisions of Sections 102 and 103 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (II of 1974) relating to search and seizure shall so far as may be, apply searches and seizure under this section. (3) Every Officer seizing specified forest produce and other property under clause (iii) of sub-section (1) above shall place on such produce, if physically possible, a property mark indicating that the same has been seized and shall except when the offender agrees in writing forthwith to get the offence compounded in the manner prescribed make a report of such seizure to the Magistrate. (4) Any Forest Officer not below the rank of a Range Officer of Forest, who or whose subordinate has seized and property other than the specified forest produce under clause (iii) of sub-section (1) may release the same on the execution by the owner thereof of a bond for the production of the property so released, if and when so required before the Magistrate. Section 19. Section 19. Power to hold enquiry.(1) Forest Officer not below the rank of a Range Officer of Forest, or such other officer as may be authorised by the Government in this behalf, may hlod enquiry into the offences relating to any contravention of any provision of this Act and the rules made thereunder arid in the course of such enquiry he shall have (i) power of the Civil Court to compel the attendance of witnesses and production of documents and material objects ; (ii) power to issue a search warrant under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (II of 1974) ; and (iii) power to receive and record evidence. (3) Any evidence recorded under clause (iii) of sub-section (1) shall be admissible in subsequent trial before a Magistrate. Section 20. Penalty.If any person contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or rules made thereunder (1) he shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to one year or fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, or both : Provided that penalties which are double of those mentioned above may be inflicted in case where the offence is committed after preparation for resistance to lawful authority or where the offender has been previously convicted of a like offence : (2) the specified forest produce in respect of which such contravention has been made or such part thereof as the Court may deem fit, and any boat, tools vehicle, animal vessel, or other conveyance or any other articles used in committing such offence shall be forfeited to Government and shall vest in Government free from all encumbrances ; Provided that if the Court is of the opinion that it is not necessary to direct confiscation in respect of whole, or as the case may be, any part of the specified forest produce or other property, it may for reasons to be reasons to be recorded refrain from doing so. (3) such forfeiture may be in addition to any other punishment prescribed for such offence. 15. (3) such forfeiture may be in addition to any other punishment prescribed for such offence. 15. It is not disputed that if any violati on of the provision of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 is suspected then the authority has been empowered to seize the specified forest produce in respect of which the commission of offence is suspected and also the vehicle used for carrying such specified forest produce but Section 20 of the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 which is the penalty section, provides forfeiture of specified forest produce which is by way of additional punishment to be awarded by the Court competent to try the offence under this Act, Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1984 has made no provision for the forfeiture or confiscation by respondent No. 2 of the vehicle used in carrying the specified forest produce in contravention of the provisions of Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act. 16. The learned counsel for the respondents referred to annexure-A to the counter affidavit which is a copy of order dated 17-9-1992 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Cr. W. J. C. No. 314 of 1992 (R) and pointed out that their lordships refused to interfere in the matter of release of the seized goods on the ground that Section 32 of the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act provides that the provisions of Indian Forest Act will be applicable in absence of any specific provision under the Bihar Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act. The matter before their lordships was concerning release of goods and not concerning confiscation and hence annexure-A to the counter affidavit is of no avail in the matter under consideration. 17. In this view of the matter, the initiation of the proceeding by respondent No. 2 for confiscation of the vehicle in question in Confiscation Case No. 2 of 1993 is to be held wholly without jurisdiction and accordingly it is hereby quashed. It is however, clarified that I have not applied myself to the facts of the case in order to find out whether any offence has been committed by the petitioner, his employees or any other person or not and it will be the subject matter of trial before the Court of competent jurisdiction. It is however, clarified that I have not applied myself to the facts of the case in order to find out whether any offence has been committed by the petitioner, his employees or any other person or not and it will be the subject matter of trial before the Court of competent jurisdiction. The quashing of confiscation proceeding will not be a defence per se in the criminal proceeding relating to the transaction in question. 18. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. AMIR DAS, J. 19 I agree.