2025:JHHC:23422 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Civil Writ Jurisdiction) W.P. (C) No.4055 of 2025 ---- Shravan Yadav @ Shrawan Yadav, aged 44 years, son of Rajendra Prasad Yadav, resident of Village-Palojori, Sub & District Deoghar, presently residing at Rasikpur near railway station, P.O. Dumka, P.S. Dumka Town, Subdivision & District - Dumka, Jharkhand. …. …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand, Nepal House, P.O.+P.S.- Doranda, Ranchi, Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, District Dumka, Jharkhand. 3. The Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka, P.O. & P.S. Dumka, District Dumka, Jharkhand. …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Adv. Ms. Richa Lal, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. J.F. Toppo, G.A.-V ---- 03/Dated: 12th August, 2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed following reliefs:- “(i) For issuance of appropriate Writ(s) /Order (s) /Direction(s) particularly a writ of Certiorari for quashing/setting aside the order dated 11.03.2025 (Annexure-4) passed by the Revisional Authority-cum-Secretary, Department of Forest, Environment and Climate Change, Government of Jharkhand in Revision Case No. 32/2023, whereby and whereunder the Revision preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure-3) passed in Confiscation Appeal Case No. 04/2022-23 by the Court of Appellate Authority-cum Deputy Commissioner, Dumka has been dismissed; and the order dated 11.04.2023 passed in Confiscation Appeal Case No. 04/2022-23 by the Court of Appellate Authority-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Dumka, whereby, the order dated 22.10.2022 passed by the authorized officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka in Confiscation Proceeding No. 27/2022 arising from Forest offence and with respect to seized truck bearing Registration No. JH04X-8936 and stone metal laden on it have been confiscated, has been upheld. (ii) For issuance of appropriate Writ(s)/Order(s)/Direction(s) commanding upon the Respondent Authorities to release the confiscated vehicle and stone metal laden in favour of the Petitioner.” 2025:JHHC:23422 Page | 2 W.P. (C) No.4055 of 2025 2. The brief fact of the case is as follows:- (i) Truck bearing registration No.JH-04X-8936 had been intercepted by the police on 26.05.2022 including other trucks on secret information that stone chips were being transported illegally without proper documentation. (ii) An offence report has been prepared being Report No.76 dated 26.05.2022 with an allegation against the truck owner under Section 42 of the Indian Forest Act,1927 and under Section 379, 411, 413 & 414 of the Indian Penal Code The complaint report has been filed in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dumka on 27.05.2022. (iii) The Court had taken cognizance under Sections 33 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 on 12.10.2022 in Complaint (O.C.R.) Case No.1055 of 2022. (iv) Upon the said complaint, the Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka has initiated a confiscation proceeding being Confiscation Case No.27 of 2022 which has been culminated in the confiscation of the Truck, in question, vide order dated 22.10.2022. (v) Against the said order of confiscation, Confiscation Appeal No.04 of 2022-2023 had been preferred but the same has been affirmed by the appellate authority vide order dated 11.04.2023. (vi) Against the appellate order, a revision being Revision Case No.32 of 2023 has been filed which has also been dismissed vide order dated 11.03.2025. (vii) Against the said order of dismissal, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. The order of confiscation has been challenged before this Court by the petitioner on following two grounds:- (i) There is no material to suggest that the stone chips were forest produce. 2025:JHHC:23422 Page | 3 W.P. (C) No.4055 of 2025 (ii) The challan produced by the petitioner has been verified and it has been found genuine so there is no offence made out whatsoever. To buttress his point, learned counsel for the petitioner has referred different orders and the report submitted by the authorities suggesting that the challan is genuine which is reflected in the appellate order itself. 4. The learned counsel for the respondents has tried to defend the impugned orders but could not point out any material suggesting the stone chips comes under the definition of “Forest Produce”. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the record, it appears that there is an allegation against the petitioner that seized stone chips are the forest produce. But, the valid challan has been produced and the challan has been found in order. Thus, it is a clear-cut case of legal business. 6. So far as the allegation of transporting forest produce is concerned, no material whatsoever has been brought to my notice suggesting that the stone chips have been mined from the forest area. Thus, the prosecution has passed the impugned order merely on the basis of secret information and suspicion without having any cogent material. 7. It is settled principal of law that any finding recorded without any evidence is perverse and not acceptable in the eyes of law. Thus, this Court finds that the order dated 11.03.2025 (Annexure-4) in Revision Case No.32 of 2023, the order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure-3) passed in Confiscation Appeal Case No.04 of 2022-2023 and the order dated 22.10.2022 (Annexure-1) passed in Confiscation Proceeding No.27 of 2022, are perverse. 8. Accordingly, the above orders are hereby quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to release the vehicle forthwith. 9. Resultantly, the present writ petition stands allowed. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Amar/- Uploaded