Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 620 (MP)

State of M. P. v. Aditya Narayan Shukla

2012-06-27

R.C.MISHRA

body2012
UDGMENT : Withconsent, matter is finally heard. Thisis a petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thepetitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 30-9-2011 passed by FourthAdditional Sessions Judge, Khandwa in Cri . Revision No. 139/11, setting aside the order passed on6-7-2010 by the Empowered Officer, viz.., Conservator of Forests, Khandwa . whereby the order dated 28-4-2008 passed byLicensing Officer, so far as it related to release of saw-mill machinery,seized for violation of sub-section (5) (c) of Section 6 and Section 9 of M.P. Kashtha Chi ran ( Viniyaman ) Adhiniyam , 1984 (for short 'the Adhiniyam '),was annulled and the same was directed to be confiscated. Asindicated already, the impugned order was passed in a case, registered asCriminal Revision whereas a bare perusal thereof would reveal that it wastreated to be criminal appeal. However, fact of the matter is that the order ofconfiscation was passed by the Empowered Officer, in exercise of suo motu power, conferred bysub-section (3) of Section 12 of the Adhiniyam , andthe same could be challenged by preferring an appeal (not a revision) undersub-section (4) thereof before the District Court (not the Court of Session),within local limits of whose jurisdiction the area wherein property has beenseized is situated. Needless to say that the 'District Court' means a PrincipalCivil Court of original jurisdiction [ Sec : Clause (4)of Section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure]. Needless to say that the 'District Court' means a PrincipalCivil Court of original jurisdiction [ Sec : Clause (4)of Section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure]. Thus,the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 12 of the Adhiniyam are not in pari materia with sub-section (2) of Section 52- A and sub-section (1) of Section 52-B of the Indian ForestAct, 1927, as applicable to the State of Madhya Pradesh .For a ready reference, these provisions may be reproduced as under: M.P. Kashtha Chiran Indian Forest Act, 1927 ( Viniyaman ) Adhiniyam , 1984 12.Confiscation of unlawful stock of wood, plants and machinery etc.- 52-A.Appeal against order of confiscation.- (1)… … … (2)… … … (3)Any Forest Officer not (2)The Appellate Authority (1)… … … (2) referred to in sub-section (1), may, where no appealhas been preferred belowthe rank of a Conservator of Forests empowered by the State Government in thisbehalf by notification, may within thirty days from the date of order ofconfiscation by the Licensing Officer under subsection (1), either " suo rnotu " or anapplication, call for and examine the records of that order and may make suchenquiry or cause such enquiry to be made and pass such orders as he may thinksfit: Provided that no order prejudicial to any person shall be passedwithout given him an opportunity of hearing heard. (4)Any person aggrieved by an order passed under sub-section (3)may, within thirty days from the date of communication to him of such order,appeal to the District Court having jurisdiction over the area in which theproperty has been seized and the District Court shall, after giving anopportunity to the parties to be heard, pass such order as it may think fit andthe order of the District Court so passed shall be final. Where as order ofconfiscation of any property passed under subsection (1) or sub-section (3) orsubsection (4) has become final in respect of the whole or any portion of suchproperty, such property or portion thereof, as the case may be, shall vest inthe State Government free from all encumbrances. Where as order ofconfiscation of any property passed under subsection (1) or sub-section (3) orsubsection (4) has become final in respect of the whole or any portion of suchproperty, such property or portion thereof, as the case may be, shall vest inthe State Government free from all encumbrances. beforehim; " suo motu "within thirty days of date of receipt of copy of order of confiscation by him,and shall on presentation of memorandum of appeal issue a notice for hearing ofappeal or, as the case may be, of " suo motu " action to the officer effecting seizure and toany other person (including appellant, if any) who in the opinion of theAppellate Authority is likely to be adversely affected by the order ofconfiscation, and may send for record of the case : Providedthat no formal notice of appeal need be issued to such amongst the appellant,officer effecting seizure and any other person likely to be adversely affectedas aforesaid, as may waive the notice or as may be informed in any other mannerof the date of hearing of appeal by the Appellate Authority. 52-B.Revision before Court of Sessions against order of Appellate Authority .- (1) Any party to the appeal, aggrieved by final order orby order of consequential nature passed by the Appellate Authority, may withinthirty days of the order sought o he impugned, submit a petition for revisionto the Court of Sessions within the Sessions division whereof the headquartersof the Appellate Authority are situate. (Emphasissupplied) Accordingly,the appeal preferred by the respondent ought to have been entertained anddecided as a Civil Appeal. Now, even if it is assumed that the expression"District Judge' includes an Additional District Judge as well as anAdditional Sessions Judge, it would not be legally permissible to interfere,under the inherent powers preserved by Section 482 of the Code, with the order,thus, deemed to have been passed by an Additional District Judge. Thepetition, therefore, stands dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to filea writ petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for the samerelief. Certifiedcopy of the impugned order be returned to the A.G.Office after retaining its photocopy on record. C.C. as per rules.