AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.) IN this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the orders as contained in Annexure -3 to the writ petition whereby the Authorised Officer -cum -Divisional Forest Officer, Chatra confiscated the seized seventeen bundles Sal Wood, three bags Charcoal, two Iron Axes, one Jack, eleven pieces of tools together with Matador bearing registration No. BR -13P -1135 in exercise of power under Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989, the order dated 16.7.1996 as contained in Annexure -4 passed by the District Magistrate, Chatra in appeal against the order of the D.F.O and also the order dated 20.8.2001 as contained in Annexure -5 passed by the Revisional Authority -cum -Secretary Ministry of Forest and Environment Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
(2.) THE sole ground for challenge of the aforesaid orders as has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that Beat Officer, who seized the vehicle i.e. Matador and other articles had no power to seize as no officer below the rank of Range Officer was empowered to seize the vehicle in terms of Section 52 (D) of the Act and therefore, the entire confiscation proceeding was vitiated. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is devoid of any merit in view of the decision of the Full Bench in the case of Bijay Krishna Sahay V/s. State of Bihar and Ors. reported in 1998 (2) East. Cr. C. 359 (Pat) wherein, the Full Bench has held that illegality of search and seizure will have no bearing on the confiscation proceeding and the criminal case. Neither the criminal case will fail nor would the confiscation proceeding become non -maintainable even if search and seizure are illegal.
(3.) IN view of the decision of the Full Bench referred to above I do not find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.;