The State Of Bihar And ORS v. Subodh Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.587 of 2015 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14478 of 2014 ===========================================================

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

2. The Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorised Officer, Rohtas, Forest Division, Rohtas at Sasaram.

3. The Forester Tilauthu, Rohtas.

.... .... Appellants

Versus

Subodh Kumar, S/o Sri Ram Prasad Sah, Resident of Village Amra, P.S. Sasaram (M), District Rohtas.

.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellants : Mr. D.K. Sinha, A.A.G. 2 For the Respondent :

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA) Date: 27-06-2016 Re.:I.A. No. 2586 of 2015 The application is for condonation of delay of 166 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal.

2. For the reasons mentioned in the Interlocutory Application, we are satisfied that the appellants have shown sufficient cause to seek condonation of delay of 166 days in filing the present Letters Patent Appeal.

3. Consequently, Interlocutory Application No. 2586 of 2015 is allowed and delay of 166 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned.

Patna High Court LPA No.587 of 2015 dt.27-06-2016 2 /2 Re.: L.P.A. No. 587 of 2015 The challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to an order dated 4th of September, 2014 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 14478 of 2014 and other analogous cases. Vide the order under appeal, the Vehicle No. UP67T-0667 seized on the allegations of transporting forest produce without any supportive papers was ordered to be released on furnishing of such security as deem fit and proper by the Divisional Forest Officer-cum-Authorized Officer subject to final outcome of the confiscation proceedings.

2. We find that the order passed is equitable and in the interest of justice so as to not deprive the owner of the vehicle from the use of the same pending finalization of the confiscation proceedings.

3. We do not find that such order of temporary release of vehicle suffers from any patent illegality or irregularity which may warrant interference in the present Letters Patent Appeal. The same is, therefore, dismissed.

(Hemant Gupta, J) (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) P.K.P.

N.A.F.R.

U