Dismissed

Janata Majhi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC29 Nov 2023WP(C)/24937/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Odisha, addressing a writ petition challenging the refusal of interim release of seized trucks used in a forest offence, held that Section 56(3) of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972 prohibits such release during confiscation proceedings. However, directing the Authorized Officer to dispose of the pending case expeditiously within eight months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Authorized Officer to dispose of the confiscation proceeding (CP No. 22 of 2020-21) within eight months and the petitioner to cooperate.

Janata Majhi Vs State of Odisha — Environment and Pollution | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

Signature Not Verified

¶2

Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 30-Nov-2023 18:34:52

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶4

W.P.(C). NO.24937 OF 2023 Janata Majhi …. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Dilip Kumar Sahu, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and another …. Opp. Parties Mr. Debendra Kumar Mohanty, Additional Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

29.11.2023

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

Judgment dated 19^th July, 2022 (Annexure-3) passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in Criminal Appeal No.03 of 2022 is under challenge in this writ petition, whereby interim release of the vehicle of the Petitioner bearing Registration No.OD-19-N-9167 and OD-16-C-6841 (Trucks), has been refused.

¶16

It is submitted by Mr. Sahu, learned counsel for the Petitioner that alleging commission of forest offence using the aforesaid vehicles of the Petitioner, confiscation proceeding in CP No.22 of 2020-21 has been initiated and pending before Authorized Officer-cum-Assistant Conservator of Forest, Keonjhar Forest Division, Keonjhar. Although, confiscation proceeding was initiated since 2021, but the authorized officer is not taking any step for its disposal. Accordingly, the Petitioner filed an application for interim release of the vehicle before Authorized Officer, which was rejected. Assailing the same, the Petitioner filed an appeal under Section 56(2-e) of the Orissa Forest Act, 1972 (for brevity ‘the Act’), which has also been dismissed by judgment dated 19^th July,

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

Signature Not Verified

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 30-Nov-2023 18:34:52

¶21

Hence, this writ petition has been filed assailing the said order.

¶22

Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that in view of the deletion of Section 57 from the Act, and in view of the clear bar under Section 56(3) of the Act, interim release of the vehicle is not permitted. However, on cooperation of the Petitioner, the confiscation proceeding can be disposed of early in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment.

¶23

Taking note of the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that in view of Section 56(3) of the Act, interim release of the vehicle seized for commission of forest offence is not permissible during pendency of the confiscation proceeding. However, it is observed that confiscation proceeding has already been initiated since 2021. Thus, steps should be taken for early disposal of the same.

¶24

Accordingly, this Court, without interfering with the impugned judgment dated 19^th July, 2022 (Annexure-3) passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in Criminal Appeal No.03 of 2022, disposes of the writ petition with a direction that the Authorized Officer-cum-Assistant Conservator of Forest, Keonjhar Forest Division, Keonjhar shall do well to dispose of CP No.22 of 2020-21 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight months from the date of production of certified copy of this order giving opportunity of hearing to the parties, if there is no legal impediment.

¶25

The Petitioner is also directed to cooperate with the authorized officer for early disposal of the CP.

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

// 3 //

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: ROJALIN NAYAK Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 30-Nov-2023 18:34:52

¶30

As requested, a copy of this order shall be handed over to Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel for communication and compliance.

¶31

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶32

Rojalin

¶33

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Janata Majhi v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Janata Majhi v. State of Odisha

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

Dashrathi Pattanaik Vs the Chairman,Odisha State Housing BOARD,BBSR-1

Santilata Behuria Vs Basanta Kumar Behuria

Pradeep Ku. Pandy Vs Jitendra Nath Pattan

Bamadeb Mishra Vs Gaji Behera

Anam Digar Vs Regional Manager Res

Vijaya Shankar Singh Deo Vs Puspa Kumari Devi