Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Ravi Kumar Basal on 1 July, 2019
1 MCRC-26612-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-26612-2019
(THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs RAVI KUMAR BASAL) Jabalpur, Dated : 01-07-2019 Shri Shashank Upadhyaya, Govt. Advocate for the applicant/State.
Heard.
This petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking quashment of the order dated 5.1.2019 passed by the VI Addl. Sessions Judge, Jabalpur, in Criminal Revision No.65/2018 arising out of order dated 13.2.2018 passed by the Appellate Authority, i.e. the Chief Conservator of Forest, Middle Forest Circle, Jabalpur, in connection with Forest Crime No.3313/2013 confirming the order of the competent Authority with regard to confiscation of Tractor No.MP51 AA 3570 and Trolley No.MP51 AA 3571 which were found carrying sand without any authority, from the forest area.
The learned A.S.J. confirming the finding of the appellate authority set aside the order directing that the owner of the vehicle is interested to compound the offence and as per the provisions of section 68 of the Indian Forest Act, the offence may be compounded and the vehicle may be released after recovery of reasonable amount and the parties were directed to remain present on 24.1.2019 before the competent authority. The aforesaid order has been challenged on the ground that the learned A.S.J. has fixed the value of the sand only Rs.300/- and has ignored the cost of the Tractor and Trolley and as such the direction is contrary to law.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, in view of this Court, this petition is misconceived and the concerned officers as well as the Legal Advisor have not gone through the provisions of section 68 of the Indian Forest Act. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, despite confiscation of the vehicle, the case may be compounded as per the provisions of section 68 of the Indian Forest Act. This court in the case of Umesh Kumar Soni Vs. State of M.P. and another, reported in 2017(2) M.P.L.J. (Cri.) , has directed that it is the duty of every Forest Officer to consider such cases first under section 68 of the Indian Forest Act then start the confiscation proceedings.
So far as determination of value of the sand is concerned, the trial court has not determined any value. It has just indicated that the value is very less and the case can be compounded. Now, it is the Forest Officer concerned to take action considering the provisions of section 68 of the Indian Forest Act without influencing by the observations made by the learned A.S.J. With the aforesaid observation, this petition is dismissed being devoid of merit.
(J. P. GUPTA)
2 MCRC-26612-2019
Digitally signed by
HEMANT SARAF JUDGE
HS
Date: 2019.07.03
10:18:20 +05'30'