AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Prasanta Kumar Sahoo, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Government Advocate.
The petitioner is the owner of a Tractor bearing Registration No. OR-19-7411 and Trailer bearing Registration No. OR-19-7412. The said Tractor and Trailer were seized by the Police at Rantali in Angul Town while it was carrying some wooden articles, namely, doors and windows. The petitioner moved the learned S.D.J.M., Angul u/s 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for release of the seized articles, but the learned S.D.J.M. passed orders refusing to release the said seized articles in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner moved this Court in CRLMC No. 2488 of 2003 u/s 482 of the Code of Criminaf Procedure, but this Court directed the petitioner to file an application u/s 57 of the Orissa Forest Act for interim release of the vehicle. The petitioner filed an application before the Authorised Officer-cum-D.F.O., Angul Division, for interim release of the Tractor and Trailer, but by order dated 30.12.2003 the Authorised Officer-cum-D.F.O., Angul Division, rejected the application of the petitioner u/s 57 of the Orissa Forest Act on the ground that the said Section 57 of the Orissa Forest Act has been omitted from the Orissa Forest Act, 1972, by the Orissa Forest Amendment Act, 2003. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for release of the said vehicles.
In the impugned order dated 30.12.2003, the Authorised Officer-cum-D.F.O., Angul Division has also cited a decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Karnataka Vs. K. Krishnan, wherein it has been held that :
"This Courts cannot shut their eyes and ignore their obligations indicated in the Act enacted for the purpose of protecting and safeguarding both the forests and their produce. The forests are not only the natural wealth of the country but also protector of human life providing a clean and unpolluted atmosphere. We are of the considered view that when any vehicle is seized on the allegation that it was used for committing a forest offence. The same shall not normally be returned to a party till the culmination of all the proceedings in respect of such offence, including confiscatory proceedings, if any, Nonetheless, if for any exceptional reasons a Court is inclined to release the vehicle during such pendency, furnishing a bank guarantee should be the minimum condition. No party shall be under the impression that release of vehicle would be possible on easier terms, when such vehicle is alleged to have been involved in commission of a forest offence. Any such easy release would tempt the forest offenders to repeat commission of such offences. Its casualty will be the forests as the same cannot be replenished for years to come."
The aforesaid judgment of the Supreme Court has been quoted in the case of Section Forester and Anr. v. Mansur Ali Khan in (2004) XXVII OCR 368 and it has been held therein that it is only in exceptional case that the High Court can grant interim release of a vehicle alleged to have been involved in commission of a forest offence and that too on the minimum condition of furnishing of bank guarantee by the party concerned.
In the present case, the exceptional circumstance is that the wooden articles seized were all finished doors and windows as stated in the seizure list filed by the police before the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Angul in C.T. No. 1974 of 2003, a copy of which has been annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-3. The said wooden articles were also not seized in any forest area but were seized from Angul town and the petitioner has stated in the writ petition that the wooden articles had been purchased by her husband and were being transported in the vehicle of the petitioner.
Considering the aforesaid circumstances of the case, we direct for release of the Tractor and Trailor under Article 226 of the Constitution subject to the petitioner''s furnishing bank guarantee of Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh) and a bond to produce the Tractor and Trailor as and when required by the Authorised Officer-cum-D.F.O., Angul Division. The said bank guarantee and bond will be furnished to the satisfaction of the Authorised Officer-cum-D.F.O., Angul Division and the release of the vehicles will be made by him within seven days of furnishing such bank guarantee and bond.
It is made clear that the Authorised Officer-cum-D.F.O., Angul Division will continue with the Confiscation Proceedings in C.P. Case No. 3 of 2003-04 arising out of O.R. Case No. 27 pg. of 2003-04 and our observations in this order will not influence in any manner the Authorised Officer-cum-D.F.O., Angul Division in deciding the said confiscation proceedings on its own merit on the basis of evidence adduced before him.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per the Rules.