JUDGMENT : ANIL KUMAR C HOUDHARY, J. Heard the parties. 2. This Writ Petition (Cr.) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to direct the respondent No.2 of the instant Writ Petition (Cr.) to release the vehicle bearing Registration No. BR-11GD-7627 in favour of the petitioner which was seized in connection with Complaint Case No.898 of 2021. 3. The brief facts of the case is that one Mahindra Pick-Up van bearing Registration No. BR-11GD-7627 was found carrying wooden planks illegally, after cutting the same from the forest area, without the permission, in violation of law and the same was seized by the officers of the Forest Department. On the basis of the prosecution report submitted, Complaint Case No.898 of 2021 has been registered and the petitioner filed a petition for release of the said vehicle bearing Registration No. BR-11GD-7627 in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Godda. Thereafter, the said petition was kept pending. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Writ Petition (Cr.), be allowed. 4. Learned AAG III appearing for the respondent- State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner made in the instant Writ Petition (Cr.) and draws the attention of this Court towards Section 52 (C) (1) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 as amended by Bihar Amendment Act 9 of 1990 which reads as under:- “ 52-C. Bar of jurisdiction of Courts etc. in certain circumstances .—(1) On receipt of intimation under sub-section (4) of Section 52 about initiation of proceeding for confiscation of property by the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence on account of which the seizure of property which is subject matter of confiscation, has been made, no Court, Tribunal (other than the authorised officer, Appellate Authority and Revision Authority referred to in Sections 52, 52A and 52B) shall have jurisdiction to make orders with regard to possession, delivery, disposal or distribution of the property in regard to which proceedings for confiscation or any other law for the time being in force. Explanation.—Where under any law for the time being in force, two or more courts have jurisdiction to try forest offence, then on receipt of intimation under sub-section (1) of Section 52 by one of the Courts of Magistrates having such jurisdiction shall be construed to be receipt of intimation under that provision by all the Courts and the bar to exercise jurisdiction shall operate on all such Courts.” and submits that it is a settled principle of law that on receipt of intimation under said Section 52 (4) about initiation of proceeding for confiscation of property by the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence on account of which the seizure of property which is subject matter of confiscation, has been made, no Court, Tribunal (other than the authorised officer, Appellate Authority and Revision Authority referred to in Sections 52, 52A and 52B) shall have jurisdiction to make orders with regard to possession, delivery, disposal or distribution of the property in regard to which proceedings for confiscation or any other law for the time being in force. 5. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no grievance against the confiscation proceeding which is going on in the court of D.F.O., Godda and the undisputed fact is that said confiscation proceeding is still going on. So, obviously, the learned Magistrate has no jurisdiction to release the same. Hence, no illegality has been committed by the learned Magistrate and in the absence of any illegality in the order passed by the learned Magistrate, this Writ Petition (Cr.), being without any merit, be dismissed. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the undisputed fact is that the confiscation proceeding is going on before the D.F.O., Godda vide Confiscation Case No.14 of 2021. The petitioner has no grievance about the said confiscation proceeding and the orders passed in the said confiscation proceeding or the said confiscation proceeding in any manner, has not been challenged by the petitioner in the instant Writ Petition (Cr.). The petitioner has no grievance about the said confiscation proceeding and the orders passed in the said confiscation proceeding or the said confiscation proceeding in any manner, has not been challenged by the petitioner in the instant Writ Petition (Cr.). Since undisputedly, the confiscation proceeding is going on and in view of the bar under Section 52 (C) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 as amended by Bihar Amendment Act 9 of 1990, this Court is of the considered view that no illegality has been committed by the learned Judicial Magistrate for not acceding to the request of the petitioner in his favour. 7. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that there is no merit in this Writ Petition (Cr.). 8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition (Cr.), being without any merit, is dismissed.