Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 775 (JHR)

Santosh Kumar Yadav v. State of Jharkhand

2011-08-10

POONAM SRIVASTAVA

body2011
JUDGMENT Poonam Srivastav, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners and also J.C. to Sr. S.C. I on behalf of the Respondents. 2. Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged. The writ petition is decided at the stage of admission itself. 3. This writ petition is directed against the order passed in Confiscation Case No. 02 of 2011 arising out of Forest Case No. FC/ 24/11-Noor Mohammed, Ajit Saha and Ors. v. The State of Jharkhand dated 15.04.2011/27.04.2011 (Annexure 4). The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Giridih (Respondent No. 2) has passed the order to confiscate the Truck bearing Registration Nos. JH09 J 8716 and JH 09 K 8716 since it was carrying stones from the mines of lease holder Shri Ajit Kumar Saha situated in village Peshra vide Challan No. 3303289 dated 12.02.2011. 4. On perusal of the order passed by the Respondent, a proceeding for confiscation of goods loaded on the truck in question was started. The proceeding was for all forest produce including trees that were cut and also stones and quartz and felspar stone that was being transported to Bhutan. The proceeding for confiscation commenced and the final order has been passed. 5. The instant writ petition is for release two trucks aforementioned which were loaded with the forest produce. 6. The contention of learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the trucks belong to one Santosh Kumar Yadav which were hired by Ajit Kumar Shaw for transporting quartz and felspar stone to Bhutan on 12th February, 2011. It is further stated in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that the consignment for transporting the stone to Bhutan was accepted and a permit from the department of Mines as well as the State Transport Authority, Ranchi was in his possession. While reaching Giridih on 12th February, 2011, the Petitioners' trucks were apprehended and the goods were seized. 7. The grievance is that the trucks are standing in the office of Respondent No. 2 since the date they were taken into custody. The trucks were purchased on loan, and the owner of the truck, who is a transporter, claims not to have any connection with the alleged theft, has applied for release, which was refused. 8. 7. The grievance is that the trucks are standing in the office of Respondent No. 2 since the date they were taken into custody. The trucks were purchased on loan, and the owner of the truck, who is a transporter, claims not to have any connection with the alleged theft, has applied for release, which was refused. 8. In the counter affidavit, assertion of paragraphs 5 and 6 of the writ petition is not disputed inasmuch as the truck belongs to Santosh Kumar Yadav and he is the owner and the truck was taken on hire by the transporter for transporting goods. 9. Learned Counsel has placed Section 53 of the Indian Forest Act which deals with the power to release the goods seized under Section 52 of the Act. Admittedly the order of seizure passed on 15.04.2011/ 27.04.2011 and the subsequent proceedings will continue in appeal and revision. Therefore, the contention is that the trucks which are standing in open under the sky without any attendant or shelter is rotting in sun and rain. They will be rendered absolute garbage and, therefore, the prayer is for release of the truck in question on the condition(s) that may be laid down in the circumstances of the case. 10. After hearing the respective counsel, I am in agreement with the contention of learned Counsel that the trucks should be released after furnishing adequate security and an undertaking to produce the trucks as and when required during the legal proceedings. The Apex Court has also ruled in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat AIR 2003 Supreme Court 638 as well as Bharath Mehta v. State by Inspector of Police, Chennai AIR 2008 SC 1970 . These decisions were on the premise: (1) Owner of the article would not suffer because of its remaining unused or there will be No. chance of misappropriation; (2) Court or the police would not be required to keep the article in safe custody; (3) If the proper panchanama before handing over possession of article is prepared, that can be used in evidence instead of its production before the Court during the trial. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of property in detail; and (4) The jurisdiction of the Court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles. If necessary, evidence could also be recorded describing the nature of property in detail; and (4) The jurisdiction of the Court to record evidence should be exercised promptly so that there may not be further chance of tampering with the articles. 11. The truck was lying at the police station for more than a year and the Petitioner was suffering heavy loss as the vehicle was purchased on loan and the owner was unable to pay the instalment, the Apex Court has passed the release order after imposing conditions. 12. Following the aforesaid decisions, I am of the opinion that the trucks bearing registration Nos. JH09 J 8716 and JH 09 K 8716 which were taken in custody on 12th February, 2011, standing in the office of the Respondent No. 2-Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Giridih and seized in connection with Confiscation Case No. 02 of 2011 arising out of Forest Case No. FC/ 24/11 shall be released forthwith in favour of the owner(s) on furnishing security of Rupees One Lac each and the personal bond of Rupees One Lac each, to the satisfaction of the Respondent No. 2 with an undertaking in the form of an affidavit that they shall produce the vehicles as and when required in the judicial proceedings. The undertaking shall be filed by the owner(s) of the vehicle in the form of an affidavit and, if necessary, photographs of the trucks shall be taken. 13. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Petition disposed of.