Ram Surat Singh vs The State Of Bihar And Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 1136 Patna

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 1136 Patna
Judgement Date : 5 August, 2025

Patna High Court

Ram Surat Singh vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 5 August, 2025

Author: Alok Kumar Sinha

Bench: Alok Kumar Sinha

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17923 of 2017
     ======================================================
     Ram Surat Singh S/o Late Parmeshwar Yadav, R/o Mahauri, P.S.- Agion
     Bazar, District- Bhojpur Ara.

                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                        Versus
1.   The State Of Bihar
2.   The Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest Dept. Govt. of Bihar,
     Patna.
3.   The Collector Rohtas at Sasaram.
4.   The District Forest Officer, Rohtas at Sasaram.
5.   The Authorised Officer cum Divisional Forest Officer Rohtas, Forest
     Division Sasaram District Rohta

                                               ... ... Respondent/s
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr.Chandra Bhushan Das
     For the Respondent/s   :      Mr.Gajendra Pd.Yadav -Sc17
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
     ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 05-08-2025
                Heard the parties.

                 2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated

     25.01.2014

passed by the Authorised Officer-cum-Divisional

Forest Officer in Confiscation Case No. 20 of 2013 followed by

Appellate order dated 30.07.2015 passed by the District

Magistrate-cum-Collector, Rohtas in Confiscation Appeal Case

No. 64 of 2014 and also the order dated 24.03.2017 passed in

Forest Revision Case No.43 of 2015 by the Principal Secretary,

Environment and Forest Department by which the earlier two

orders have been upheld.

Patna High Court CWJC No.17923 of 2017 dt.05-08-2025

3. It is the case of the petitioner that on 26.02.2013

tractor bearing Registration No.BR-03G-6940 and trailor bearing

No. BR.03G-6941 were seized by forest employees loaded with

logs of Mango and logs of Mahua timbers which were alleged to

be brought from Protected Forest Area. Copy of the seizure report

was sent but learned Judicial Magistrate, Vikramganj and to the

Authorised Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Rohtas Forest

Division. Subsequently, a confiscation proceeding bearing

Confiscation Case No.20 of 2013 was initiated under Section 52(3)

of Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment, 1990) Act, 1927 and notice

was issued to the petitioner. Petitioner participated in the said

proceeding and filed his reply. The said confiscation proceeding

culminated in passing of the impugned order dated 25.01.2014

passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Rohtas Forest Division in

which it was held that forest produce, I,e., logs of Mango and logs

of Mahua timbers were illegally brought from Protected Forest

Area. Being aggrieved by this, the petitioner had challenged this

order by filing an appeal before the District Magistrate-cum-

Collector, Rohtas vide Confiscation Appeal No.64 of 2014 in

which final order was passed on 30.07.2015 upholding the order of

the Authorised Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Rohtas

Forest Division om 30.07.2015. Finally, the petitioner had Patna High Court CWJC No.17923 of 2017 dt.05-08-2025

challenged both these orders for filing a revision case before the

Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest Department vide

Forest Revision Case No.43 of 2015 in which final order was

passed on 24.03.2017 upholding the previous two orders.

4. The contention of the petitioner is that the logs of

Mango and logs of Mahua timbers were being grown on the rayati

land of one Suresh Dubey bearing Khata No.815, plot No.2037

area 15 decimal and that it was not being brought from Protected

Forest Area. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits

that as on 26.02.2013, the logs of Mango and logs of Mahua

timbers were outside the definition of forest produce and,

therefore, the entire seizure which has laid to the confiscation of

the vehicle is illegal and without jurisdiction. There is specific

averment in paragraph 5 of the writ application with regard to the

logs of Mango and logs of Mahua timbers being grown on rayati

land of one Suresh Dubey. In this regard, paragraph 5 of the writ

application is quoted hereinbelow for needful :-

"5. That the owner of the seized timber in question, namely, Suresh Dubey of village Lahthan, P.S.- Agion, Prakhand-Piro, District - Rohtas had obtained valid permission from the Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Lahthan for cutting 15 pieces of Mango tree and 10 pieces of Mahua tree which were grown in his raiyati land Khata No.815 plot No.2037 area 15 decimals. In this Patna High Court CWJC No.17923 of 2017 dt.05-08-2025

connection valid transit permit to that effect was issued by the concerned Gram Panchayat for carrying the same to the nearby Saw Mill."

5. The fact that these timbers were grown on the rayati

land has not been denied or controverted by the respondent-State

in their counter affidavit.

6. Upon careful perusal of the impugned orders, i.e., the

order passed by the Division Forest Officer dated 25.01.2014

(Annexure 3), Appellate Order dated 30.07.2015 (Annexure-4) and

final order passed in Revision Case No. 43 of 2015 (Annexure-5)

dated 24.03.2017, it is clear that the logs of Mango and logs of

Mahua timbers were alleged to be brought from Protected Forest

Area, however, there is no iota of evidence on record which can

even remotely suggest that the logs of Mango and logs of Mahua