Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


DARSHAN SINGH v STATE - CRLMP Case No. 1012 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 3363 (16 July 2007)




Darshan Singh Versus State of Rajasthan.

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 1012/2007 against the order dated 07-04-2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri

Ganganagar in Criminal Case No. 356/2007. ...

Date of Order : 16/07/2007



Mr. Rakesh Matoria, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ashok Upadhyaya, Public Prosecutor for the State.


Issue notice for final disposal. Mr. Ashok Upadhyay, public prosecutor is directed to accept notice for the respondent

State. He accepts the notice. Learned counsel for the petitioner has supplied the copy of criminal revision petition to public prosecutor.

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is finally heard and decided at the admission stage.

By the instant criminal miscellaneous petition under

Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the

Code" hereinafter), the petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.04.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Sriganganagar (for short 'the trial court' hereinafter) in Criminal

Case No. 356/2007 arising out of FIR No. 78/2007 Police Station,

Sriganganagar for the offence under Section 41-42 of the Forest Act whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 Cr.P.C. seeking to release the wood seized.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the wood seized were purchased by the petitioner in an auction held on 31.1.2007 conducted by the Forest Department and after paying the cost of the wood, the same were being transported. Learned counsel submits that a notification dated 19.1.1991 has been issued by the State Government which provides that certain woods have been exempted from being forest produce and Shisham, kikar etc. fall in that category and thus according to learned counsel for the petitioner, the wood seized was not a forest produce.

Rule 3 of the Rules, 1957 pertains to exemption from forest produce and provides that in exercise of the powers conferred under the proviso to rule 2 of the Rules, 1957, the State

Government exempts transportation of forest produce of the following species for destination within the State of Rajasthan; namely Eucalyptus, Su-Babul, Ardu, Vilaiti Babul, Israeli Babul,

Deshi Babul and Shisham.

This Court in Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan,

S.B.Criminal Misc. Petition No. 658/2006 decided on 13.10.2006 on similar facts allowed the petition and released the wood on

Supurdginama. In this view of the matter, in my view, the ends of justice would be met if the wood in question is released on

Supurdginama to the petitioner.

In the result, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 07-04-2007 passed by the trial

Court in Criminal Case No. 356/2007 is set aside and the trial Court is directed to release the wood in question on Supurdginama to the petitioner on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with a surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

(H.R. PANWAR), J. rp.


Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.