- (1.) J. C, Mishra, J. This revision has been filed against seizure of saw machine, its part and woods stored at saw mill on 18- 3-1997 and also to set aside the order dated 26-4-1997 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, III, Allahabad rejecting the applicant's prayer for release of the seized articles.
(2.) A copy of the seizure memo (annexure-4) shows that on 18th March, 1997 at 3. 20 p. m. the S. D. M. Phulpur, CO. Phulpur. D. F. O. and Range Officer raided the saw mill of the revisionist and in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court closed the saw mill, seized timbers and woods kept at the platform alongwith separable parts of saw machine. The revisionist filed an application for release before Judicial Magistrate II, Allahabad. After hearing the learned Counsel for the revisionist and A. P. O. rejected the applicatin on 26-3-1997. Felt aggrieved the revisionist filed an applica tion under Section 482, Cr. P. C. , read with Section 397, Cr. P. C. . On 21-8- 1997 the Bench concerned held that since the order is revisable its inherent powers should not be invoked and therefore, directed the application to be treated as revision and permitted the applicant to make necessary amendments. I have heard Sri D. S. Mishra, learned Counsel for the revisionist and learned A. G. A. The learned Counsel for the revisionist contended that no licence is required for running the saw mill in view of the Uttar Pradesh Establishment and Regulation of Saw Mills Rules, 1978 and the Uttar Pradesh Transit of Timber and othei Forest Produce Rules, 1978, as these rules are not applicable to the ordinary operation of the domestic carpentry or to other similar work on small scale.
(3.) THE learned Counsel contended that the revisonist has already been permitted to make wooden furniture and permanent registration certificate in this regard was issued by the Industries Department, which indicates that the saw mill was be ing used as domestic carpentry or for similar work on small scale and therefore no licence for operating the saw mill was required. He referred to the certificate is sued by the District Industries Centre dated 19-6-1971 which indicates that the applicant was permitted to make wooden furniture for establishing industry on small scale in the name and style of Rakesh and Ravi Wooden Furniture and House Windows in village Sahado, Phulpur, Allahabad. The learned Counsel for the revi sonist also pointed out that earlier in the year 1994 the saw mill of the revisionist had been closed and his application for release was rejected by the Judicial Magis trate ill, Allahabad. The order was chal lenged by him in Criminal Revision No. 721 of 1994 which was decided by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Alla habad directed the Magistrate to re consider the applicatin in accordance with the observations made by him. After re mand the learned Magistrate released the saw machine subject to his furnishing per sonal bond of Rs. 25,000;- with two sure ties each in the like amount.;