Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 745 (JHR)

Krishna Rajak v. State of Jharkhand

2023-06-13

RAJESH SHANKAR

body2023
JUDGMENT : The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 28.09.2010 passed by the respondent no. 2 – the Principal Secretary, Department of Forest & Environment, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi-cum-Revisional Authority in Revision Case No. 46/2009, whereby the said revision filed by the petitioner against the order dated 12.08.2008 passed by the respondent no. 3 – the District Magistrate/Deputy Commissioner, Bokaro-cum-Appellate Authority in Confiscation Appeal No. 30/2006 confirming the order of confiscation dated 10.07.2006 passed by the respondent no. 4 – the Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Bokaro Forest Division, Bokaro with respect to the seized vehicles including the tractor along with trailer belonging to the petitioner bearing registration No. JH-09C-3622, has been dismissed. Further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated 12.08.2008 passed by the respondent no. 3 in Confiscation Appeal No. 30/2006 dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 10.07.2006 passed by the respondent no. 4 in Confiscation Case No. 06/2004, whereby the seized vehicles including the aforesaid tractor along with trailer of the petitioner was ordered to be confiscated. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order dated 10.07.2006 passed by the respondent no. 4 in Confiscation Case No. 06/2004, whereby the seized vehicles including the tractor along with trailer of the petitioner were ordered to be confiscated as well as for issuing direction to the concerned respondent to release the vehicle (Tractor No. JH-09C-3622 along with trailer) in favour of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that the respondent no. 4 had initiated a common Confiscation Case i.e., Confiscation Case No. 06/2004 with respect to several vehicles i.e., HMT Tractor No. JH-09C-3622, HMT Tractor No. JH-11B-4089 and HMT Tractor No. JH-11B-7434 along with their trailers for allegedly carrying 4 tones of coal on each trailer as well as two motorcycles bearing registration No. BPU-8778 and JH-02B-9372 which were seized on 04.03.2004 in connection with Nawadih P.S. Case No. 13/2004 for the offences under Sections 413 and 414 of IPC. The petitioner is owner of HMT Tractor bearing registration No. JH-09C-3622. 3. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that one Jai Ram Mahto – owner of Tractor No. JH-11B-4089 which was also confiscated vide order dated 10.07.2006 passed by the respondent no. The petitioner is owner of HMT Tractor bearing registration No. JH-09C-3622. 3. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that one Jai Ram Mahto – owner of Tractor No. JH-11B-4089 which was also confiscated vide order dated 10.07.2006 passed by the respondent no. 4 in Confiscation Case No. 06/2004 filed a writ petition before this Court being W.P.(C) No. 807 of 2011 and the same was disposed of by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order/judgment dated 28.02.2013 in following terms: 6. In view of the aforesaid provision and settled proposition of law, as also in view of the fact that the respondent- State Government is unable to show anything on record that the Notification published in January 21, 1953 in issue of Bihar Gazette has been subsequently renewed and extended and therefore, the order passed by the appellate authority which was confirmed by the Revisional Authority is required to be quashed and set aside and the matter is required to be remitted for reconsideration and the petitioner can be given permission/liberty to raise this issue before the appropriate authority in a de novo proceedings if any initiate by the authority. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 28.9.10 passed in Forest Revision Case No. 49/2009 is ordered to be set aside. Consequently, the matter is remitted back to the Forest Officer-cum-D.F.O. for de novo consideration, for taking further steps if required in accordance with law. As and when such proceedings will be initiated, the petitioner will be at liberty to raise this issue before the competent authority and the said authority shall decide the same in accordance with law after taking into account the provision discussed herein above. 7. So far as confiscation of the vehicle in question is concerned, respondent No. 4 -the Divisional Forest Officer, Bokaro is directed to release the Tractor bearing Registration No. JH 11B 4089 with trailer on furnishing usual undertaking and bonds if any to the satisfaction of the authority concerned. 8. So far as criminal case is concerned, the same shall be decided in accordance with law by the competent court having jurisdiction in the matter. 9. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. 4. 8. So far as criminal case is concerned, the same shall be decided in accordance with law by the competent court having jurisdiction in the matter. 9. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that LPA No. 323 of 2013 preferred by the State of Jharkhand against the order dated 28.02.2013 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 807 of 2011 has already been dismissed for default vide order dated 12.07.2018 and, therefore, the order passed in the said writ petition has become final and binding on the parties. Under the said circumstance, the present writ petition may also be disposed of in terms with order dated 28.02.2013 passed in W.P.(C) No. 807 of 2011 and the concerned vehicle i.e., HMT Tractor bearing registration No. JH-09C-3622 along with trailer may be ordered to be released in favour of the petitioner. 5. Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned Sr. SC-III appearing on behalf of the respondents, though contests the matter on merit, yet she accepts the fact that HMT Tractor bearing registration No. JH-11B-4089 which was concerned in W.P.(C) No. 807 of 2011 as well as the petitioners’ vehicle being HMT Tractor bearing registration No. JH-09C- 3622 were commonly involved in Confiscation Case No. 06/2004 initiated by the respondent no. 4 and were confiscated vide impugned order dated 10.07.2006. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and to maintain parity between the similarly situated persons, the present writ petition is also disposed of in terms with order/judgment dated 28.02.2013 passed by learned co-ordinate Bench in W.P.(C) No. 807 of 2011. 7. Consequently, the order dated 28.09.2010 passed by the respondent no. 2 in Revision Case No. 46/2009 is set-aside. The matter is remanded to the respondent no. 4 for making de novo consideration and for taking further steps, if required, in accordance with law. The petitioner will be at liberty to raise the concerned issue before the competent authority as and when such proceeding is initiated and the said authority shall decide the same in accordance with law after taking into consideration the issue as discussed in the order/judgment dated 28.02.2013 passed in W.P.(C) No. 807 of 2011. The respondent no. The petitioner will be at liberty to raise the concerned issue before the competent authority as and when such proceeding is initiated and the said authority shall decide the same in accordance with law after taking into consideration the issue as discussed in the order/judgment dated 28.02.2013 passed in W.P.(C) No. 807 of 2011. The respondent no. 4 is also directed to release the vehicle concerned in the present case i.e., HMT Tractor bearing registration No. JH-09C-3622 along with trailer on furnishing usual undertaking and bonds, if any, to the satisfaction of the respondent no. 4. 8. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. I.A. No. 6804 of 2013 also stands disposed of accordingly.