HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21643 OF 2006 DATED 1ST AUGUST, 2014.
BETWEEN E.L.N.V. PRASAD …..Petitioner and State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. By Divisional Forest Officer, Kadapa, Kadapa District …..Respondent.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21643 OF 2006
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order dated 31.07.2006 passed in Forest Appeal Suit No. 2 of 2006 by the learned Principal District Judge, Kadapa. The said appeal was preferred against the order passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Kadapa in O.R.No. 30/2005-2006, dated 20.10.2005.
On 31.08.2005 at around 3.30 PM on the basis of the information received regarding clandesting transport of illicit red sanders extracted from reserve forest, the forest staff checked all the vehicles along the National highway and at around 7.00 PM they intercepted one tractor bearing hay which was coming from Mydukur towards Kadapa town. On interception of the said tractor, the staff noticed three persons in the tractor cabin who made an attempt to escape. The forest officers managed to arrest two persons at the scene and the third person escaped from the scene of offence taking advantage of the thorny buses in the vicinity and on further inspection, the officers noticed dressed red sanders logs hidden beneath the hay which did not bear any departmental hammer mark. On further enquiry, the two apprehended persons confessed that they had extracted red sanders timber illicitly from the surrounding reserve forest and they furnished their names and addresses. The said two persons furnished to the staff the address of the person who escaped from the scene. The forest staff enquired two accused regarding the site of loading in the reserve forest and accordingly they accompanied to Airevuni gundalu locality in the reserve forest which is under the administrative jurisdiction of Pathuru beat of Prodattur range. On further search, the staff were able to retrieve two red sanders logs which were concealed in the nearby bushes which were also seized. It was noticed that there were 82 red sanders logs loaded in the tractor vehicle. The two red sanders logs seized at the site of loading were also added to the above offence report. The eighty four red sanders logs were weighed and their dimensions were recorded in the presence of the forest staff and the accused. The seized red sanders timber seizure, the tractor and trailer bearing Nos. AP 26U 8419 and AP 26 U 8420 respectively along with accused were produced before the Authorized Officer cum Divisional Forest Officer, Kadapa at around 11.15 PM.
The owner of the vehicle, the petitioner herein, on coming to know of the seizure of the vehicle through local news paper and enquiries sought release of the vehicle and filed a petition before the Authorized Officer. His case was that he hired the said tractor to one B.Rama Krishna of Chinnamasupalli for 10 days on 27.08.2005 to transport sand from Chennur River. He also stated that he is having 10 acres of agricultural land at his village and he purchased the said vehicle for agricultural purpose and he has no knowledge of the offence. He further stated that the person to whom the tractor was given on hire was arrayed as A.7 and he was arrested red handed at the scene of offence. The Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Kadapa has inspected the tractor immediately after the seizure on 31.8.2005 and found that the inner sides of the container of both the tractor and container contained old shreds and pieces of old red sanders timber and came to conclusion that the said tractor vehicle and trailer had been used for similar smuggling purposes in the forest offence. Since the petitioner mis-utilized the vehicle, the Authorized Officer did not see any necessity for issuing separate notice to the owner of the vehicle and passed order rejecting the request of the petitioner for release of the vehicle and ordered for confiscation along with accessories and 84 red sander logs under Sub-section 2(A) of Section 44 of the AP forest Act, 1967.
Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal in Forest Appeal Suit No. 2 of 2006 before the learned Principal District Judge, Kadapa, who observed that neither the petitioner nor the owner who was arrayed as Accused No.7 could produce any permit for transporting sand and hence the plea taken by the petitioner that he has permit to transport the sand is not correct. But curiously, the learned Principal District Judge observed that unless and until the entire investigation and prosecution of the case is completed one cannot say that there is no involvement of the owner of the vehicle in the case of smuggling red sanders and accordingly held that it is not a fit case for interim custody of the vehicle. Accordingly the appeal was dismissed.
The learned Principal District Judge failed to note that the order passed by the respondent was a composite order rejecting the request of the petitioner for interim custody of the vehicle as well as ordering confiscation along with the goods. It is a final order passed under Section 44 of the AP Forest Act. The appeal preferred before the learned Principal District Judge was for substantial relief and not confined to the interim custody of the vehicle. The learned Principal District Judge has specifically observed that involvement of the owner of the vehicle cannot be decided unless and until the entire investigation and the prosecution of the case is completed. The trial of the case is independent of the proceedings and seizure under the provisions of the Forest Act. In the circumstances, the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Kadapa in Forest Appeal Suit No. 2 of 2006, dated 31.07.2006 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Principal District Judge, Kadapa to decide the appeal in accordance with law independent of the criminal prosecution under the provisions of the AP Forest Act by treating it as substantive appeal against confiscation and seizure of the goods under Section 44 of the AP Forest Act and dispose of the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. Till the disposal of the appeal by the learned Principal District Judge, Kadapa, the interim order passed by this Court granting interim custody of the vehicle subject to the condition that the petitioner furnishes bank guarantee to the value of the said vehicle to the satisfaction of the Divisional Forest Officer, Kadapa and also giving an undertaking that he would not alienate and create any encumbrance on the said vehicle, would be in operation and the petitioner shall abide by the result of the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge.
Subject to the above observation, the Writ Petition is allowed. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
JUSTICE A RAMALINGESWARA RAO DATED 1ST AUGUST, 2014.
Msnro