In this Letters Patent Appeal arising from a writ jurisdiction case, a split bench dismissed the appellant's appeal against the single Judge's order upholding the confiscation of a tractor involved in a forest offence, holding the vehicle had indisputably been involved in the offence.
No relief granted; appeal dismissed in limine.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No.1431 of 2012 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16725 of 2011
====================================================== Ram Keshwar Singh, Son of Late Chandradeo Singh, Resident of Ujjaini, P.S.- Tandwa, District- Aurangabad
.... .... Petitioner/Appellant Versus
====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Udit Narayan Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, A.C. to G.A. 1.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 05-02-2013 Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 19th July 2012 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 16725 of 2011, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent.
Matter at issue is the confiscation of the vehicle, the tractor bearing Registration No. BR-26A-2746 of the ownership of the appellant. The vehicle is involved in the forest offence. The order has been upheld by the learned single Judge. Therefore, this Appeal.
Learned Advocate Mr. Udit Narayan Singh has appeared for the appellant. He has strenuously urged that the
Patna High Court LPA No.1431 of 2012 (2) dt.05-02-2013
2 / 2
vehicle has not committed any offence. It is either the driver or the owner who has committed the offence. The vehicle, therefore, could not be confiscated. He has further submitted that the vehicle would decay if kept in the custody of the authority below.
We see no substance in the contention raised before us. Indisputably the vehicle has been involved in forest offence. We see no merit in this Appeal. Appeal is dismissed in limine .
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
Sujit/-
(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the vehicle playing an instrumental role in a forest offence can be confiscated.
Whether the vehicle has properly been restrained and declared as a forfeited property.
As to confiscation of the vehicle through an appeal under clause 10 of the Letters Patent?
Ram Keshwar Singh
The State of Bihar
The Secretary, Environment and Forest Department, Govt. of Bihar
The Collector-Cum-District Magistrate, Aurangabad
The Forest Divisional Officer-Cum-Authorized Officer, Aurangabad
Other Respondents
Right Honourable Chief Justice R.M. Doshit
Honourable Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
