2025:JHHC:27699 1 W.P.(C) No. 4990 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4990 of 2025 Manoj Kumar Sah, aged 54 years, son of Late Ramnath Sah, resident of Village- Bandhpara, P.O. Dumka, P.S. Dumka Town, Subdivision & District- Dumka, Jharkhand ….........Petitioner(s) Vrs. 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 : Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mr. P.C. Sinha, A.C to G.A.-III 02/11.09.2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s): “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. 28/2023, whereby and whereunder the Revision preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure-3), passed in Confiscation Appeal Case No. 08/2022-23 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. 08/2022 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. JH04B-6594 and stone Chips laden on it have been confiscated, has been upheld.” 2. The brief fact of the case is as follows: i. Petitioner is the owner of Truck bearing registration no. JH-04V-6594. ii. Challan bearing No. F122100127/18 issued to the Petitioner for transportation of stone chips by the truck of 2025:JHHC:27699 2 W.P.(C) No. 4990 of 2025 the Petitioner. iii. On 26.05.2022 18 vehicles including the Petitioner's truck were intercepted at Rampur More on Dumka Rampurhat Main Road, for allegedly transporting stone chips without proper documentation iv. On 27.05.2022 complaint containing Offence Report No. 76 dated 26.05.2022 with allegations levelled against all the truck owners under Section 42 of Indian Forest Act and Section 379, 411, 413 and 414 of IPC filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dumka. v. On 29.09.2022 Challan furnished by the Petitioner verified to be valid as stated in the verification report obtained through RTI. vi. On 12.10.2022 cognizance for offence under section 33 and 42 of Indian Forest Act taken as against the Petitioner and other drivers in Complaint (O.C.R.) Case No. 1055/2022. Confiscation Case No. 27/2022 initiated for confiscating all the trucks in which show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner to which he had duly replied. vii. On 22.10.2022 order of the D.F.O., Dumka in Confiscation Case No. 27/2022 without recording subjective satisfaction in relation to reasons to believe that the vehicle was carrying forest produce or has committed forest offence, to confiscate the vehicles and also the stone metal loaded therein. viii. On 11.04.2023 Confiscation Appeal No. 08/2022-23 filed by the Petitioner against the order dated 22.10.2022 was dismissed. ix. On 11.03.2025 Revision Case No. 28/2023 against the order dated 11.04.2023 and 22.10.2022 was dismissed. 3. The order of confiscation has been challenged before this Court 2025:JHHC:27699 3 W.P.(C) No. 4990 of 2025 by the petitioner on the following grounds: i. Whether the impugned orders are bad in law and against the materials on record? ii. Whether the confiscation proceeding in itself is bad for want of jurisdiction and justification as no offence relating to forest produce has been committed? iii. Whether the Adjudicating Authority, the Appellate Authority and the Revisional Authority have failed to consider and record reasons to believe that a forest offence has been committed, rather the petitioner has submitted challan which has been found to be genuine and the presumption that loaded chips is a forest produce is without any evidence? iv. Whether the Adjudicating Authority, Appellate Authority and Revisional Authority have failed to consider that the stone chips were being transported through challan, which proves and establishes that they had been lawfully removed and hence, no forest offence is being attracted in the facts and circumstances to confiscate the truck and the loaded chips? v. Whether the Adjudicating Authority, Appellate Authority and Revisional Authority have failed to consider that there is no evidence or reasons to believe to establish that the stone chips loaded on the truck was a forest produce? vi. Whether there can be any justification in confiscating the vehicle or the loaded chips in absence of evidence leading to reasons to believe that a forest offence has been committed? vii. Whether the vehicle in question being a commercial vehicle is allowed to remain idle for long without any shelter and proper care, it may be subjected to wear and tear and will cause undue loss and hardships to the Petitioner? viii. Whether the actions of the Respondents are violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India? 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 2025:JHHC:27699 4 W.P.(C) No. 4990 of 2025 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 learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the record, it appears that there is allegation against the petitioner that the 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 authorities have passed the impugned orders 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), passed by the Revisional Authority in Revision Case No.28 of 2023, the order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure-3) passed by the Appellate Authority in Confiscation Appeal No. 08 of 2022-23 and the order dated 22.10.2022 (Annexure-1) passed by the respondents in Confiscation Case No.27 of 2022 in connection with forest offence Complaint Case No. OCR No. 1055 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. 10. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) A.Mohanty