Madhya Pradesh High Court
Brijesh Kumar Jaiswal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 April, 2019
1 MCRC-49000-2018
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-49000-2018
(BRIJESH KUMAR JAISWAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
4
Jabalpur, Dated : 10-04-2019
Shri N.S.Ruprah, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Pradeep Sharma, G.A. for the respondent/State.
With the consent of parties, this petition is heard finally. This petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred assailing the order dated 25.8.2018 passed by I ASJ, Devsar, District Singrauli, in Criminal Revision No.43/2018 confirming the order dated 23.7.2018 passed by JMFC Devsar, District Singrauli, in Crime No.112/2018 whereby the application filed by the applicant under section 457 Cr.P.C. for release of vehicle bearing registration No.UP64-T-5453 has been rejected.
Having heard the contention of the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it is found that vehicle Truck bearing registration No.UP.64/T- 5453 has been seized in connection with Crime No.112/2018 registered at Police Station Chitrangi, District Singrouli, for the offence under sections 41(1)(d) Cr.P.C., section 379 and 414 of the I.P.C., section 2, 41 and 52 of the Indian Forest Act, section 27, 29, 39-D and 51 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, section 4 read with section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.
From perusal of the record, it is found that in view of the provisions of section 52-C of the Indian Forest Act, on getting information with regard to initiation of confiscation proceedings of a vehicle, the Magistrate denied to release the vehicle as he has no jurisdiction for the same. The said order was confirmed by the revisional court.
In view of this Court, the learned Magistrate and the revisional court have not committed any error in passing the impugned orders. Recently, Hon'ble the Apex court in the case The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Uday Singh dated 26.3.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal No.524/2019 has also held that in view of the provisions of section 52-C of the Act, after getting information with regard to initiation of confiscation proceedings by the competent Forest Officer, the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to release the vehicle.
In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law, the impugned orders are affirmed. The applicant, however, has a remedy under sections 52(3) and (4) of the Indian Forest Act with regard to challenging the confiscation proceedings and getting the vehicle on Supurdginama.
Accordingly, this petition is dismissed with liberty to take recourse of law as permissible under the Indian Forest Act, particularly section 52(3) and (4) of the Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF Date: 10/04/2019 17:05:29 2 MCRC-49000-2018 Indian Forest Act.
(J. P. GUPTA) JUDGE HS Digitally signed by HEMANT SARAF Date: 10/04/2019 17:05:29