Madhya Pradesh High Court
Jayhind @ Hayendra Singh Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 August, 2025
Author: Hirdesh
Bench: Hirdesh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16628
1 MP-1301-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HIRDESH
ON THE 5 th OF AUGUST, 2025
MISC. PETITION No. 1301 of 2023
JAYHIND @ HAYENDRA SINGH YADAV
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kabir Quraishi - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Nirmal Sharma - Government Advocate for State.
ORDER
The instant Misc. Petition is preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 24.11.2022 passed in CRR No.102/2021 by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior whereby the order dated 02.06.2021 passed by Appellate Authority/Officiating Van Sanrakchak Forest Circle, Gwalior in Appeal No.05/2021 was affirmed and the order dated 25.02.2021 passed by Up Vaan Mandal Adhikari, Gwalior in Forest Case No.783/2023 by which the dumper of petitioner bearing Registration No.UP93-BT-1813 has been confiscated observing the involvement of said dumper in forest land.
2. Brief facts for disposal of this petition are that on 08.01.2021 under the supervision of Van Mandal Adhikari Gwalior the In-charge Sub-Range Devgarh beat guard Barkari and other forest staff were patrolling for preventing of illegal mining of circle Barkari. While patrolling, they found Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 8/8/2025 10:14:35 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16628 2 MP-1301-2023 that in forest beat Barkari the sand extraction affected beat no. P177 near the area limit, but in revenue area one dumper was seen who is carrying out the sand. The forest guard had stopped him and asked from its driver about sand mining and transportation document but no any document was available with the driver thereafter the forest staff had checked the dumper and found that the dumper was registered vide registration No.UP93-BT-1813. The name of driver was disclosed as Bhagwan Das resident of Jalaun. The said dumper was seized on spot and prepared the seizure memo and panchnama dated 08.01.2021 and registered the case under the provision of Sections 52 and 41 of Indian Forest Act for the confiscation proceeding. The said dumper was kept in police station Gijorra.
3. Thereafter, on 09.01.2021, the Forest Circle Officer has informed Up Van Mandal Adhikari and authorized officer about the seizure and intimation was also given to the Judicial Magistrate. Confiscation proceeding has been started and authorized officer taken the evidence and passed the order for confiscation on 25.02.2021.
4. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, petitioner filed an appeal before Appellate Authority and Appellate Authority unfortunately ignored the material evidence available on record and confirmed the order passed by the authorized officer on 02.06.2021. Challenging the order passed by the Appellate Authority, petitioner has filed criminal revision before the Revisional Court and learned Additional Sessions Judge after passing impugned order, rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner and affirmed the orders passed by the Appellate Authority as well as authorized officer.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 8/8/2025 10:14:35 AMNEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16628 3 MP-1301-2023
5. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, petitioner filed this petition on the ground that alleged vehicle was not seized in the forest land, but was seized in the revenue area, therefore, order of the authorities deserves to be quashed. It is further submitted that from the evidence of one Prashant Sharma and Kalicharan Chaturvedi - Forest Guard, it is clear that dumper was seized in revenue area. No FSL report was filed which would reveal that seized sand was collected from the forest land/area.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents/State opposed the prayer and submitted that impugned order is passed after considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and is passed in accordance with settled principles of law and no interference is warranted in the impugned order.
7. Heard rival contentions of the parties and perused the available record.
8. From the evidence of witnesses, it is clear that alleged vehicle was seized in revenue area, not in forest area. After perusal of the evidence of the forest guard before authorized authority, it reveals that witnesses have clearly stated that alleged vehicle was seized from the revenue area and they have also stated that no FSL report was placed before concerned authority which would reveal that collected sand was from forest area. So, it cannot be proved that sand was collected from forest area.
9. It was also apparent that according to the panchnama and GPS reading, it does not show the alleged sand excavation was done in forest area. As per the forest record, it was also not proved that sand was collected Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 8/8/2025 10:14:35 AM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:16628 4 MP-1301-2023 from forest area. So, in considered opinion of this Court, it was not proved that confiscated vehicle has been found excavating sand from the forest area.
10. In view of the above discussions, it is found that impugned order passed by Sessions Court and Appellate Authority as well as Authorized Officer is not correct in the eye of law and is hereby set aside.
11. Accordingly, the seized vehicle i.e. dumper ( v i d e registration No.UP93-BT-1813) be released and hand over to the petitioner in accordance with law.
With aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
C.C.as per rules.
(HIRDESH) JUDGE *VJ* Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIJAY TRIPATHI Signing time: 8/8/2025 10:14:35 AM