Disposed

Rai Jee v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC1 Jul 2021CWJC/10836/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ for release of truck illegally seized for alleged illicit loading. Court granted liberty to file appropriate appeal under the Forest Act within four weeks to consider release on merits. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file appeal under Section 52A of the Forest Act, 1927 within four weeks; appellate authority to consider release of vehicle upon proving ownership and subject to conditions.

Rai Jee Vs The State of Bihar — Writ and Judicial Review | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 10836 of 2020

¶2

=============================================

¶3

Rai Jee aged about 35 years (Male) son of Rajendra Singh, resident of village-Jamuara Andwar Karma, Police StationSuryapura, District-Rohtas

¶4

--------- Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Forest and Environment, Bihar, Patna

¶7

The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorized Officer, Rohtas, Forest Division, Rohtas at Sasaram

¶8

The Forester, Darigaon Range, Rohtas

¶9

--------- Respondents

¶10

=============================================

¶11

Appearance:-

¶12

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to SC-15

¶13

=============================================

¶14

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH

¶15

ORAL ORDER

¶16

3. 01.07.2021 The present petition has been taken up for consideration

¶17

through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the

¶18

prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State Shri. Sanjay Kumar, AC to SC-15.

¶20

The present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondent authorities to release the vehicle of the petitioner i.e. the truck bearing Registration No. UP 67 T-0751 which has been illegally seized on the premise that illicit stone chips were loaded on the said vehicle.

¶21

It appears that the respondent authorities had lodged a case against the petitioner bearing Forest Case No. 58 of 2020 (Confiscation Case No. 79 of 2020).

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the vehicle was seized on 27.07.2020, whereafter he had filed a petition for release of the vehicle, nonetheless, the vehicle has not been released till date.

¶23

Per contra, the learned counsel for the State Sri. Sanjay Kumar, AC to SC-15 has submitted that the aforesaid Confiscation Case No. 79 of 2020 has already been finally

¶24

decided vide order dated 04.02.2021 passed by the Authorized Oficer-cum-Forest Divisional Officer, Rohtas, Forest Division, Sasaram, hence now the remedy available to the petitioner is to file an appeal under Section 52A of the Forest Act, 1927. It is also submitted that the petitioner can make a fresh prayer for release of the vehicle in question, after filing the appeal, inasmuch as the appellate authority has the power to release the vehicle in question under Section 61 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927.

¶25

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as also considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I deem it fit and proper to grant liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate appeal under Section 52A of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 before the appellate authority against the order dated 04.02.2021 passed by the Forest Officercum-Forest Divisional Officer, Rohtas Forest Division, Sasaram in Confiscation Case No. 79 of 2020 and in case such an appeal is filed within a period of four weeks from today, the same shall be considered on merits without the appellate authority being

¶26

impeded by the issue of limitation.

¶27

It is needless to state that in case the petitioner files an appeal within four weeks from today, the appellate authority shall consider the case of the petitioner for provisional release of the vehicle upon production of proof of ownership and registration of the vehicle as also subject to such conditions as may be deemed fit and proper to be imposed and pass appropriate orders in that regard.

¶28

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

¶29

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)

¶30

S.Sb/-

Rai Jee v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rai Jee v. The State of Bihar

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

Sona Devi Vs the State of Bihar

M/s Mastan Cycle Store Guarantor Md. Nasimuddin Raeen @ Mo. Nasimuddin Vs Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank and Anr.

Prabhu Dayal Vs The State of Bihar

Subhash Rai Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rajeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Hasamuddin Ansari @ Juman Ansari Vs The State of Bihar