Kishor S/O Murlidhar Borkar vs The State Of Mah. Thr. Forest Range ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6722 Bom

3.cwp.464.22                                                                                     1/2


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                               Criminal Writ Petition No.464 of 2022
                                 Kishor Murlidhar Borkar
                                           vs.
     The State of Maharashtra, through Forest Range Office, Jambhali-2, Dist. Gondia
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders                      Court's or Judge's Orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

                             Mr. R.D. Wakode, Advocate for the Petitioner.
                             Mr. H.D. Dubey, Advocate for the Respondent.

                                         CORAM       : VINAY JOSHI, J.

                                         DATE        : 15th JULY, 2022.

                                         Heard.

                             02]         The petitioner has impugned herein the order

dated 01/03/2021 passed in the criminal revision by which the order of release of motor vehicle viz. Tractor and Trolley, has been set aside by the revisional Court. The petitioner's motor vehicles have been seized allegedly carrying forest produce. The petitioner applied to the jurisdictional Magistrate for release of the vehicle in terms of Section 457 of the Code which was allowed. The State feeling aggrieved by said order, filed revision in which the order of release of vehicles is set aside. The revisional Court held that the Magistrate has no jurisdiction to release the vehicles which were seized in terms of Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act.

03] The petitioner's learned Counsel would submit that in pursuance of the Maharashtra Amendment to Section 52 of the Act, it is a mandate to make report of seizure under Section 61A to the Forest Officer. According to him, in absence of such report, the Magistrate gets jurisdiction to

3.cwp.464.22 2/2

release the property on supratnama. To substantiate the said contention, reliance is placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Kamlesh Jaduramji Yadao vs. State of Maharashtra and another - 1997(1)Mh.L.J.198.

04] Issue notice to the respondent, returnable after two weeks.

05] The learned A.P.P. waives notice on behalf of the respondent.

JUDGE *sandesh

Signed by:SANDESH DAULATRAO WAGHMARE Private Secretary to the Hon'ble Judge Signing Date:18.07.2022 14:53