Disposed

Ranjit Karna v. State

Orissa HC16 May 2017WP(C)/19586/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged illegal seizure of a vehicle. Counsel withdrew prayer for release but sought direction to conclude confiscation proceedings within three months to prevent vehicle deterioration. Court granted direction to respondent to conclude proceedings within three months and preserve vehicle condition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party to conclude confiscation proceedings within three months and take steps to keep vehicle in good running condition.

The petitioner, in this writ petition, challenges the seizure and dete ntion of the vehicle (Mahindra Bolero Pick Up) bearing Regd. No.OR-19D-6018, to be illegal, un just and improper with a prayer to direct the opposite party no.2-Authorized Officer-cum-Divi sional Forest Officer, Rairakhol Forest Division, Rairakhol to release the said vehicle in his favour.

During the course of hearing on admission, learned counsel appearing f or the petitioner does not want to press the prayer made in this writ petition considering the fact that interim release of the vehicle is prohibited under the statue in a confiscation pro ceeding under Section 56 of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972. However, he seeks for a direction to the opposite party no.2-Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Rairakhol Forest Div ision, Rairakhol to conclude the confiscation proceeding vide O.R. Case No. 125R of 2016-2017 within a stipulated period inasmuch as the condition of the vehicle in question is deteriorati ng being exposed to sun and rain which is neither beneficial to the petitioner nor to the pros ecution.

Considering the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the p etitioner, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the opposite party no.2-Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Rairakhol Forest Divisi on, Rairakhol to proceed with the aforesaid confiscation proceeding vide O.R. Case No. 125R of 2016-2017 and conclude the same within three months of receipt/production of certified copy o f this order or communication of this order whichever is earlier and also take necessary steps to keep the vehicle in good running condition.

The petitioner is directed to cause production of the certified copy of this order bef ore the O.R. Case No. 125R of 2016-2017 and cooperate in the hearing of the confiscation proce eding. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

Ranjit Karna v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Karna v. State

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

Janhabi Mohanty Vs State of Orissa

Subarna Dehury Vs State of Orissa

Butu@Niranjan Pradhan Vs State of Orissa

Biswajit Panda Vs State of Orissa

Fadan Majhi Vs State of Orissa

Chani Behera Vs Gopinath Baske