LexSTATE OF KARNATAKA versus K. KRISHNAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D E F G STATE OF KARNATAKA v. K. KRISHNAN AUGUST 17, 2000 [K.T. THOMAS AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 : S. 62-Forest produce-Unauthorised transportation of-Seizure of along with the vehicle-Authorised officer directing to release the vehicle on furnish- ing bank guarantee-Order challenged u/s. 482 Cr.P.C.-High Court modify- ing the order and directing release of vehicle on furnishing sureties-Held, order is contrary to law-Vehicle used in committing a forest offence when seized, shall not normally be returned till culmination of all proceedings including confiscatory proceedings-For exceptional reasonsfurnishing a bank guara(ltee should be the minimum condition-No opinion expressed on power of High Court u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. in the matter. A jeep and a lorry along with certain forest produce, which was being transported in violation of the provisions of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, were seized by the Range Forest Officer. The respondent filed an application for release of the jeep to him on interim custody. The Author- ised Officer ordered the vehicle to be released to the respondent, inter alia, subject to the condition that respondent would furnish irrevocable bank guarantee. The respondent filed a petition under s.482 Cr.P.C. for quash- ing of the order of the Authorised Officer and for unconditional release of the Vehicle. The High Court directed that the order of Authorised Officer relating to the bank guarantee would stand modified and the respondent would furnish two sureties for purpose of getting interim custody of the jeep. Aggrieved, the State Government filed the present appeal. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1.1. The order impugned is contrary to law. The approach adopted both by the Authorised Officer and the High Court i;ompletely ig- nores the importance of the forests and the purpose of the object for which the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 was made. When any vehicle is seized on the .allegation that it was used for committing a forest offence, the same H shall not normally be returned to a party till the culmination of all the pro- 490 .. - STATE v. K. KRISHNAN [SETHI, J.] 491 ceedings in respect of such offence, including confiscatory proceedings, if A any. Nonetheless, if for any exceptional reasons a Court is inclined to re- lease the vehicle during such pendency, furnishing a bank guarantee should be the minimum condition. No party shall be under the impression that re- lease of vehicle would be possible on easier terms, when such vehicle is al- leged to have been involved in commission of a forest offence. B [494-G-H; 495-B] 1.2. The provisions of the Act are required to be strictly complied with and followed for the purposes of achieving the object for which the Act was enacted. Liberal approach in the matter with respect to the prop- erty seized, which is liable to confiscation, is uncalled for as the same is C likely to frustrate the provisions of the Act. Before passing an order for releasing the forest produce or the property used in the commission of the forest offence, the Authorised Officer or the Appellate Authority has to specify the reasons which justify such release, apparently, prima facie excluding the possibility of such forest produce or the property being confiscated ultimately. [ 494-C-D] D 1.3. Since the appellant-State has not prayed for quashing the order of the Authorised Officer, this Court refrains to deal with the matter further, though the Court does not approve it. Further, the Court has its reservations with respect to the powers of the High Court under s.482 E Cr.P.C. in the matter. [495-C] CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 668 of 2000. From the Judgment and Order dated 11.10.99 of the Karnataka High F Court in Crl.P. No. 2852 of 1999. N.P. Midha and N. Ganpathy for the Appellant. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SETHI, J. Leave granted. A jeep bearing Registration No.KL! 3839 and Lorry with Registration No.KA-21-2071 were seized by Shri Padmanabha Gowda, Range Forest Of- ficer, Puttur on 3.9.1997 along with six Kiralbhogi Jogs, a forest produce which was being transported without the permit in violation of the provision of the G H A B c D E F 492 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2000] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). After reg- istration of Case No.199/96-97, the vehicles along with the s
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.