Orissa High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 06-Oct-2025 15:20:35 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.21769 of 2025 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227of the Constitution of India, 1950). Gitanjali Sahu State of Odisha & Ors. -versus- …. …. Petitioner(s) Opposite Party (s) Advocates appeared in the case through Hybrid Mode: For Petitioner(s) For Opposite Party (s) : : Mr. Ananta Narayan Pattanayak, C.K. Rout, S.K. Mallick, Adv. Miss Gayatri Patra, ASC CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI DATE OF HEARING:-08.08.2025 DATE OF JUDGMENT:-25.09.2025 Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J. 1. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner being the owner of the vehicle in question (TATA ACE having registration No.OD-01-C-2675) which is seized based on the allegation of transportation of Forest Goods, has
Legal Reasoning
challenged the order dated 30.03.2024 passed by the learned District Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in FAO No.30 of 2022 and the order dated 04.07.2022 passed by the Authorized Officer-cum-Assistant Conservator of Forest, Baripada in OR Case No.155B of 2018-2019 converted from UD Case No.28B of 2018-19, Baripada. Page 1 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 06-Oct-2025 15:20:35 In addition to the above challenge, the Petitioner has also sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3 for releasing the above noted vehicle in her favour. I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE: 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: (i) On getting some credible information regarding illegal transportation of forest goods i.e. timber the Forester, Badampur Section along with other staffs of Betnoti Range on 28th October, 2018 detained the above noted TATA ACE vehicle which was coming towards them from Bhagabandihi village. On seeing the said Officials the driver of the TATA ACE fled from the spot by leaving the said vehicle. On search, though the Forest Officials recovered two pieces of Neem logs with bark measuring volume 4.74 cft, five pieces of Acacia pole and two quintals of mixed firewood without any mark of hammer impression on the said timbers from the said TATA ACE vehicle, no R.C book and legal documents pertaining to the said forest goods were there in the said vehicle. After seizure of the said goods nobody came forward to claim the seized products. Accordingly, the Forest Officials seized the above noted vehicle along with all the timbers and other products loaded in the said vehicle. Accordingly, a seizure list was prepared in presence of the available witnesses having seizure hammer No.FD-SZD-16. (ii) Soon after seizure of the above noted vehicle along with the goods loaded therein a Forest Offence Case vide U.D. Case No.28B of 2018-19 was prepared. Thereafter, on query, it was ascertained from the R.T.O, Balasore that the Petitioner is the registered owner of the above noted Page 2 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 06-Oct-2025 15:20:35 seized vehicle. On getting notice the Petitioner appearing before the authority concerned stated that she had no knowledge regarding transportation of the above noted seized Forest goods through her vehicle in question. She further contended that the driver of the vehicle was transporting the seized goods being misguided by someone. (iii) Thereafter, the Forester, Badampur Section arrested the Petitioner and converted the above noted U.D. Case to OR Case No.155B of 2018-19. Accordingly, the Petitioner was forwarded to the Court of J.M.F.C, Betnoti. The advance P.R. against the Petitioner was also submitted before the Court for contravention of Rules 4, 12 & 14 of the Odisha Timber & Other Forest Produce Transit Rule, 1980. At the same time, the Range Officer intimated the D.F.O, Baripada, Forest Division for taking further action in the matter. (iv) On getting the case record, the D.F.O, Baripada appointed one Sandeep Parthy, I.F.S (Probationer), ACF, Baripada Forest Division as the Authorized Officer. On being appointed, the Authorized Officer-cum- ACF issued show cause notice to the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Petitioner submitted her reply to the said show cause notice. In the meantime, since Sandeep Parthy, I.F.S was transferred to some other
Legal Reasoning
Division, the D.F.O, Baripada again appointed Sri Sarat Kumar Mishra, A.C.F, Baripada as the Authorized Officer. After some time since said Sarat Kumar Mishra was transferred one Dillip Kumar Barik was appointed as the Authorized Officer to deal with the case of the Petitioner. Page 3 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 06-Oct-2025 15:20:35 (v) Now, the present Authorized Officer after recording evidence and hearing all the parties concerned found that the above noted TATA ACE vehicle was involved in illegal transportation of above noted seized Forest produces. Thereafter, the Authorized Officer ordered for confiscation of the above noted seized vehicle. (vi) Being aggrieved with the said order of the Authorized Officer, the Petitioner preferred an appeal vide FAO No.30 of 2022 before the Court of learned District Judge, Mayurbhanj. Thereafter, upon hearing both the parties and looking to the averments made in the said appeal memo, the learned District Judge confirmed the order of confiscation of the above noted vehicle passed by the learned Authorized Officer. (vii) Being aggrieved by the above noted orders of the learned Authorized Officer and also the learned District Judge, Mayurbhanj passed in the above noted FAO the Petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition. II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER: 3. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions: Challenging the above noted impugned orders, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the learned District Judge has passed the judgment dated 30.03.2024 in the above noted FAO without taking into consideration the fact that the Seizing Officer who happens to be a Forester and prepared the initial prosecution report, had no jurisdiction to conduct the inquiry whereas the provision at Rule 4(2) of the Orissa Timber and other Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1980 mandates that the Page 4 of 9 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 06-Oct-2025 15:20:35 Range Officer should conduct the inquiry and not by an Officer subordinate to such rank. 5. 6. He further contends that since the above noted vehicle was used in illegal transportation of forest produces without the knowledge of the Petitioner, the decision relied on by the learned District Judge, Baripada in Sanjib Mishra Vrs. State of Orissa 1 in passing the impugned order in the above noted FAO is not appropriate. He, in the process, relies on the following decisions to support the case of the Petitioner:- a. State of Odisha Vrs. Raghunath Pradhan and Anr.2 b. Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vrs. State of Gujarat3 c. Ashis Ranjan Mohanty Vrs. State of Odisha and Ors.4 d. General Insurance Council and Ors. Vrs. State of Andhra Pradesh5 7. He, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this Writ Petition. III. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES: 8. 9. The Learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties earnestly made the following submissions in support of her contentions: In her opposition, learned counsel for the State submits that the vehicle was seized due to unauthorized transportation of forest produces.She