Telangana High Court
Smt.Rena Bhukya vs The Principal Secretary, on 9 March, 2023
Bench: Ujjal Bhuyan, N.Tukaramji
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
WRIT APPEAL No.292 of 2023
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr. K.Anantha Rao, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr. Malugari Sudharshan, learned Government
Pleader for Forest Department representing the respondents.
2. This intra-court appeal has been preferred by the
appellant being aggrieved by the direction of the learned
Single Judge to furnish security of fixed deposit to the extent
of Rs. 4 lakhs.
3. Appellant had filed the related writ petition
assailing the action of respondent Nos.3 and 4 in confiscating
the tractor of the appellant bearing registration No.TS 17 T
1979 under Section 44(2-B) of the Telangana Forest Act,
1967.
2 HCJ & NTRJ
W.A.No.292 of 2023
4. From a perusal of the order passed by the learned
Single Judge, we find that as per allegation of the
respondents, tractor of the appellant was seized by the forest
officials on the ground that it was used to plough forest land
and also in transporting firewood from the forest. Initially,
the tractor was seized whereafter it was confiscated by
respondent No.3 under Section 44(2-B) of the Telangana
Forest Act, 1967. Assailing the same, appellant filed the
related writ petition.
5. Learned Government Pleader for Forest had
submitted before the learned Single Judge on the basis of
written instructions that appellant's tractor was involved not
only in the ploughing of forest land but also in removing 15
cart loads of forest produce. Therefore, this was a forest
offence, for which the tractor was rightly confiscated.
6. Learned Single Judge after hearing learned
counsel for the rival parties observed that the tractor was
seized in the year 2021. Therefore, a direction was issued to
3 HCJ & NTRJ
W.A.No.292 of 2023
respondent Nos.3 and 4 to release the tractor subject to the
following conditions:
1. appellant to furnish security of fixed deposit of
Rs.4 lakhs;
2. appellant to furnish an undertaking that she
would not transfer or change the nature of the
tractor; and
3. she will not use the tractor for committing any
forest offence in future.
7. While disposing of the writ petition, learned Single
Judge further observed that if the tractor gets involved in
similar offence in future, it would be liable to seizure
forthwith.
8. Before us, learned counsel for the appellant
submits that directing the appellant to furnish fixed deposit of
Rs.4 lakhs as security is on the higher side and causing
hardship to the appellant.
4 HCJ & NTRJ
W.A.No.292 of 2023
9. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader
submits that because of commission of forest offence, a
criminal case has been registered. It is therefore necessary
that some security should be furnished by the appellant.
10. Be that as it may, after hearing learned counsel for
the parties and on due consideration, we are of the view that
it would meet the ends of justice if the quantum of fixed
deposit to be furnished as security is reduced from Rs.4 lakhs
to Rs.1 lakh.
11. While maintaining the order of the learned Single
Judge, more particularly paragraph 5 of the order dated
02.11.2022, we modify the direction of the learned Single
Judge to the appellant to furnish security by way of fixed
deposit to be limited to Rs.1 lakh. Rest of the order remains
as it is.
12. Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed of. However,
there shall be no order as to costs.
5 HCJ & NTRJ
W.A.No.292 of 2023
13. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if
any, in this Writ Appeal, shall stand closed.
_______________________
UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ
_______________________
N.TUKARAMJI, J
Date: 09.03.2023
KL
