JUDGMENT 1. - Issue notice for final disposal. Mr. JPS Choudhary, learned Public Prosecutor accepts the notice. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code" hereinafter) is being heard and decided at the admission stage. 2. By the instant petition under Section 482 of the Code, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.1.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhilwara (for short, "the Revisional Court" hereinafter), in Criminal Revision Petition No. 16/2008, whereby revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 18.1.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bhilwara (for short, "the trial Court" hereinafter) was dismissed. 3. The facts of the case, in a nut shell are that petitioner's bull-cart was seized on being found carrying Neem wood. He made an application under Section 457 of the Code, which has been dismissed by the learned trial Court and the revision against that order also stood dismissed vide impugned order. Hence this criminal miscellaneous petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the wood recovered from the petitioner is the Neem wood and the wood is not the prohibited wood. 6. Rule 3 of the Rules, 1957 pertains to exemption from forest produce and provides that in exercise of the powers conferred under the proviso to rule 2 of the Rules, 1957, the State Government exempts transportation of forest produce of the following species for destination within the State of Rajasthan, namely, Eucalyptus, Su-Babul, Ardu, Vilaiti Babul, Israeli Babul, Deshi Babul and Shisham. 7. Learned counsel submits that on similar facts, this Court, in Naresh v. State of Rajasthan, 2006(3) CJ (Raj.) Criminal 1468 , and Jeet Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 2007(3) R Cr.D. 481 (Raj.) modified the condition of bank guarantee to the extent of furnishing a personal bond along with one surety. 8. I have carefully gone through the order impugned. In the order impugned, it has been mentioned that green Neem wood was being carried in the bull-cart. 8. I have carefully gone through the order impugned. In the order impugned, it has been mentioned that green Neem wood was being carried in the bull-cart. In view of rule 3 of the Rules of 1957 and the fact that the State Government itself exempted Eucalyptus, Su-Babul, Ardu, Vilaiti Babul, Israeli Babul, Deshi Babul and Shisham, therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that the wood carried in the bull-cart falls within the definition of forest produce. In view of the decisions of this Court in Naresh v. State of Rajasthan (supra) and Jeet Singh v. State of Rajasthan (supra), the criminal miscellaneous petition deserves to be allowed. 9. In the result, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the orders impugned dated 29.1.2008 and 18.1.2008 passed by the Revisional Court and the trial Court respectively, are set aside and it is directed that the bull-cart in question shall be released in favour of the petitioner on Supurdginama on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- along with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court with the stipulation therein that during the pendency of the criminal case, the petitioner will neither alienate nor transfer the said bull-cart and keep it in good condition and he will produce the same as and when called upon to do so.Petition allowed. *******