Disposed

Abedur Rahman v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Feb 2019WP(C)/574/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought completion of confiscation proceedings and return of seized timber. Court directed the Divisional Forest Officer to decide and furnish papers within 60 days, allowing a bond-based release application simultaneously.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No. 3 to decide on confiscation or release under Section 49 within 60 days and provide papers to petitioner.

Abedur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010016842019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 574/2019

¶5

ABEDUR RAHMAN

¶6

S/O SADER ALI, VILLAGE- MATIABOG, P.O. GOURIPUR, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783331.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.

¶9

TO BE REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶10

2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS REHABARI GUWAHATI- 781008.

¶11

3:THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER-CUM-DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER HAILAKANDI P.O. AND DIST. HAILAKANDI PIN- 788151.

¶12

4:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE ALGAPUR POLICE STATION P.O. KALIBARIBAZAR DIST. HAILAKANDI PIN- 788150.

¶13

5:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER MAMIT FOREST DIVISION MAMIT MIZORAM DIST. MAMIT P.O. MAMIT

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

STATE- MIZORAM PIN- 796441.

¶16

6:THE RANGE OFFICER RAWPUICHHIP FOREST RANGE RAWPUICHHIP DISTRICT- MAMIT STATE- MIZORAM PIN- 796410

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A SARMA

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶19

BEFORE

¶20

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Date : 08-02-2019

¶23

Heard Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department, Govt. of Assam for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Mr. R. Dhar, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 4. Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 be served through Ms. P. Bhattacharjee, learned Govt. Advocate, Mizoram.

¶24

Extra copies within 3 (three) days.

¶25

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a direction to respondent No. 3 Divisional Forest Officer, Hailakandi to complete the confiscation proceeding arising out of Sadar Beat Forest Case Nos. 18 and 19 of 2018. An additional prayer has been made to direct respondent No. 3 to hand over the seized timber to the petitioner.

¶26

Case of the petitioner is that he was the consigner of timber (teak logs) which were being transported from Mizoram to Dhubri by two trucks bearing registration No. NL-01-Q-0512 and UP-31-T-6610. The two trucks were intercepted by anti-social elements at a place under Algapur Police Station. Petitioner immediately informed the police. To meet the situation police

¶27

Page No.# 3/4

¶28

personnel from Algapur Police Station came to the spot and brought the situation under control. Thereafter petitioner lodged first information on the basis of which Algapur PS Case No. 184/2018 was registered under Sections 366/34 IPC. Following the same forest officials seized the truck alongwith the teak logs which was informed to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi by respondent No. 3 on 20.11.2018.

¶29

Grievance of the petitioner is that till date he has not received any notice or intimation from respondent No. 3 regarding any proceeding drawn up pursuant to such seizure. It is in such circumstances that the present writ petition has been filed seeking the reliefs as indicated above.

¶30

On 30.01.2019, Mr. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel was directed to obtain instruction regarding status of proceeding arising out of Sadar Beat Forest Case No. 18 and 19 of 2018.

¶31

Today, when the matter is called upon, Mr. Dutta, learned standing counsel submits that confiscation proceeding has been initiated. However, the case number has not been furnished to him.

¶32

Seizure of property is only a temporary measure which can be taken resort to if any Forest Officer not below the rank of Forester and any police officer not below the rank of Subinspector of Police has reason to believe that a forest offence has been committed in respect of any forest produce. As per Sub-section (4) of Section 49 of Assam Forest Regulation, 1891 where the authorised officer upon production before him of the property seized or upon receipt of a report about seizure, as the case may be, and after such personal inspection or verification as may be deemed fit and necessary, is satisfied that a forest offence has been committed in respect thereof, he may by order in writing and for reasons to be recorded therein confiscate the forest produce so seized together with the vehicle(s) etc used in committing such offence. However, under Sub-section (5) of Section 49, no order confiscating any property shall be made under the preceeding provisions unless the authorised office sends an intimation in the prescribed form about initiation of proceeding for confiscation of property to the judicial magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence on account of which the seizure has been made, issuing notice in writing to the person from whom the property is seized and to any other person who may appear to the authorised officer to have some interest in such property and after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to such person. Under Section

¶33

Page No.# 4/4

¶34

49 (A) any Forest Officer not below the rank of Forest Ranger may release any seized property on execution of a bond for production of the property so released if and when required.

¶35

That being the position, respondent No. 3 is directed to take a decision one way or the other under Section 49 of the Assam Forest Regulation, 1891 within a period of 60 days from today. Since petitioner is before the Court he may appear before respondent No. 3 within 2 (two) weeks from today. Respondent No. 3 shall furnish all the papers connected with seizure and confiscation proceeding to the petitioner. If the petitioner files an application for release of the seized timber the same may also be considered by respondent No. 3 on execution of appropriate bond by the petitioner with suitable conditions.

¶36

With the above directions, writ petition is disposed of.

¶37

A copy of this order may be furnished to learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department for doing the needful.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

Abedur Rahman v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abedur Rahman v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jakir Hussain Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Nilakanta Daflari and 8 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Sri Bidyadhar Doley (Madhab) Vs Nilakanta Daflari and 13 Ors.

Praveen Baishya and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Renu Sarmah Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Kamrup Valley Suppliers Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.