- (1.) By Court:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents State.
(2.) The petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order dated 29.06.2010 passed by the respondent No. 2, Revisional Authoritycum-Principal Secretary, Forest and Environment Department, Ranchi, in Forest Case (C ) No. 57 of 2009 whereby, the revisional authority has upheld the order of confiscation of the truck of the petitioner. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing the order dated 03.01.2005 passed by the confiscating authority i.e. the Divisional Forest Officer, Ranchi whereby, the truck of the petitioner bearing Registration No. CG 04 6556 was confiscated as it was found to be involved in the forest offence, as, 185 pieces of chiran saal wood was recovered from the said truck of the petitioner. The confiscation order was challenged by the petitioner in appeal, being Confiscation Appeal No. 13 R 15/2005-06, which was also rejected by the Appellate Authority-cum- Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, by order dated 17.12.2008, which is also impugned in this writ application .
(3.) The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. On 16.05.2004 the petitioner's truck was seized loaded with 185 pieces of chiran saal wood and the driver of the truck was also apprehended, who informed that the wood were loaded on the truck at Sunita Saw Mills, Chainpur, District Gumla, which was being run by Mahmood Ali, and he was asked to wait near petrol pump at Sidraul, Namkum, Ranchi. As no document of the wood was produced by the driver of the truck, the truck was seized by the Forest Officials under the provisions of Section 52 (1) of the Indian Forest Act and the case was instituted for the offence under section 42 of the Indian Forest Act, wherein the petitioner has been made accused being the owner of the truck. Admittedly the petitioner was not apprehended along with the truck. It appears that the petitioner had faced the trial and he was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 42 of the Indian Forest Act by the Trial Court, being the Court of Sri D. K. Mishra Judicial Magistrate, 1 st Class, Ranchi, by the Judgment and Order dated 19.01.2007 passed in Forest Case No. 27-A of 2004. The petitioner had challenged the said order in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 2007 which was allowed by the learned A.J.C., Vth, Ranchi by order dated 17.01.2008 wherein, it has been held that on the basis of the evidence brought on record, though the occurrence was well established by the prosecution, but so far as involvement of the petitioner was concerned, it was only on the basis of the admitted fact that he was the owner of the vehicle. None of the witnesses had stated that the alleged chiran saal wood from the saw mill was being carried out without valid papers within the knowledge of the owner of the vehicle, even though the allegation against the petitioner was that he had given remuneration to the driver for carrying the said chiran saal wood, the same could not be proved by the prosecution, and accordingly the learned Appellate Court held that the petitioner had no knowledge of the occurrence and he could not be convicted for the offence and accordingly, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Trial Court against this petitioner, was set aside.;