AMIT KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder the writ in the nature of certiorari has been sought to be issued for :-

(2.) The brief facts of the case of the petitioner as per the pleadings made in the writ petition is that a prosecution has been initiated by the forest officials on 11.05.2015 of an allegation of illegal mining of coal from Jordag Notified Protected Forest Area and by the raiding party when the vehicle bearing registration No.JH-02R-9666 while intercepted the driver of the said truck did not stop rather with a very high speed the driver turned his vehicle towards Barkagaon-Hazaribagh Main Road. Patrolling party chased the said vehicle and wanted to take side but they have not succeeded in intercepting the vehicle, even on the forest check post, vehicle was not stopped rather dashed with a wooden pole and when searched out it was found to be loaded with coal and therefore, a prosecution was initiated for commission of forest offences under Section 33, 41 and 42 of Indian Forest Act, the vehicle was seized along with the coal and were brought to the range office for save custody. Seizure report was prepared and the prosecution report was sent before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh. A copy of the said prosecution report has also been sent before the competent authority to initiate a confiscation proceeding, in pursuance thereto, the confiscation proceeded has been initiated by the Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Hazaribagh in which the various documents have been produced along with the documents issued by the Central Coal Fields Ltd. showing the purchase of coal and thereafter the authorized officer has passed the order confiscating the vehicle along with the coal loaded therein against which appeal has been preferred which has been declined to be interfered with that the order passed by the authorized officer, against which the revision has been filed but the revisional authority has also declined to interfere and therefore, the instant writ petition has been filed assailing all the three orders inter alia on the ground that the authorized officer has not appreciated the genuineness of the documents pertaining to the purchase of coal which has been found to be genuine on its examination by the Range Officer of Forest and ignoring the said document merely on account of the fact that the driver has accelerated the speed of the vehicle and not stopped the same and in stead of travelling through the shortest route, travelled through the longest route of 165 k.m. for coming to Ranchi.

(3.) Per contra, Mr. Manoj Kumar No.3, learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand has vehemently opposed the submission, ground and the reason of establishing the order as not sustainable by the petitioner on the ground that the authorized officer before taking the decision of confiscation of the vehicle and the coal loaded therein has taken into consideration the conduct of the driver who has accelerated the speed and stopped the vehicle and not only that, he has taken the longest route of 165 k.m. in stead of travelling 75 k.m. for reaching to its destination, these facts shows that some misdeed has been committed by the driver and therefore, the authorized officer while passing the order finding the charge levelled against the aforesaid vehicle to be true by coming to the conclusion that the ingredient of the violation of the necessary provisions of law as under Indian Forest Act, 1927 has been attracted.