PREM LAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of present criminal writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 02.01.2017, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Vikasnagar, Dehradun.

(2.) It is an admitted fact that the vehicle in question in present case was seized by the police, and not by the forest officials. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that Section 52A (Uttaranchal Amendment) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, shall came into play only when a forest offence is believed to have been committed in respect of any forest produce, which is the property of the State Government. The officer seizing the property under sub-section (1) of Section 52 shall seize it without unreasonable delay, produce it together with all tools, boats, vehicles, cattle, ropes, chains or other articles used in committing the offence before an officer not below the rank of the Divisional Forest Officer authorised by the State Government in this behalf. It is also the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the vehicle in question was never produced before the Divisional Forest Officer. Even report was not given to him and, therefore, the vehicle shall be disposed of by the Magistrate concerned and not by any Divisional Forest Officer / Conservator of Forest.

(3.) Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 (Uttaranchal Amendment), reads as under: