Ajay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar, Through The Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Government Of Bihar, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.725 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Ajay Kumar Son of Sri Bajrangi Sah, Resident of Village- Loko Dehri, Police Station- Chauri, District- Bhojpur.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. The District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram.

3. The Divisional Forest Officer-cum- Authorized Officer, Rohtas Forest Division, Sasaram, District- Rohtas.

4. The Forest Range Officer, Tilauthu, District- Rohtas. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajani Kant Singh, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Singh (Aag13) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 29-06-2017 Heard the parties.

The truck of the petitioner, bearing registration no. HR 55L-6798, was seized in connection with Forest Case No. 44 of 2017 for the reason that the same was carrying stone chips allegedly without a valid chalan.

Prayer is for interim release of the said truck in favour of the petitioner on the ground that no purpose is going to be served by continued seizure of the truck rather the petitioner is day-by-day looser in his business and is ready to abide all the terms and conditions of release and result of the Forest Case. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that they have no objection if interim custody of the truck is given in favour of the petitioner on execution of proper surety bond. It appears that the petitioner has not approached before the authority where the above referred Forest Case is pending for release of the vehicle. The petitioner may first

Patna High Court Cr. WJC No.725 of 2017 (2) dt.29-06-2017 2/2 approach the Court, concerned, and, if thereafter, grievance still remains. The petitioner may approach the appropriate forum under proper jurisdiction.

With the aforesaid observation, this application stands disposed off.

(Birendra Kumar, J) SA/- U √ T √