Jharkhand High Court
Indrajeet Kumar Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand. ....Opposite ... on 13 June, 2018
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 804 of 2018
----
Indrajeet Kumar Yadav .....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand. ....Opposite Party
-----
Coram: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
--------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate : Mr. Kundan Kumar Ambastha, Advocate For the State : APP.
--------
04/13-06-2018 Heard the parties.
In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 4.1.2018, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra in Cr. Revision No. 103 of 2017 whereby and whereunder order dated 7.11.2017 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra in connection with complaint case no. 393 of 2017 rejecting the prayer for release of JCB vehicle bearing registration no. JH-19B-1470 in favour of the petitioner has been affirmed.
It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that no confiscation proceeding could be initiated with respect to the allegations made in the prosecution report as it has been alleged that JCB machine was being used for levelling the road. It has further been submitted that there is no allegation that JCB machine was involved in digging the forest land, which would attract an offence under the Forest Conservation Act. It has also been submitted that JCB Machine is facing vagaries of weather and in such circumstances the same be released on an interim basis, for which he has referred to an order passed by this Court in the case of Angesh Singh @ Angesh Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in 2016 (1)JCR 95 (Jhr).
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
It appears from the records that on the allegation that JCB machine of which the petitioner claims himself to be the owner was levelling the road the same led to institution of a forest case. A confiscation proceeding was initiated being Confiscation Case No. 9 of 2013 with respect to confiscation of JCB vehicle bearing registration no. JH-19B-1470. The petitioner had filed an application before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra, which on being rejected on 7.11.2017 was challenged in Cr. Revision No. 103 of 2017, which however was also rejected on 4.1.2018.
-2-Since the confiscation proceeding has already been initiated for confiscation of the vehicle, I am not inclined to entertain this application at this stage. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file an application for interim release of JCB vehicle before the confiscating authority and if such application is filed the confiscating authority shall take into consideration the submissions advanced by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, which has been recorded in the preceding paragraphs as also the judgment cited by him and shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of ten days from the date of filing of such application.
It is made clear that the confiscating authority shall not be prejudiced by either of the orders passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra or by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra, which is under challenge in the present application.
This application stands disposed of with the aforementioned observations and directions.
( Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) Rakesh/-