2025:JHHC:26957 1 W.P.(C) No. 3824 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 3824 of 2025 Anil Kumar Jha, aged about 47 years, son of Shanbhu Shankar Jha, resident of Ward No. 27, Hathipahar, P.O. and P.S.- Baidnathpur, District-Deoghar, 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, having its office at Dumka, P.O. Dumka , P.S. Dumka, District Dumka. 3.The Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka, having its office at Dumka Forest Division, P.O. Dumka, P.S. Dumka, District Dumka 4.The Range Forest Officer, Hijla, East Forest Range, having its office at Bandarjori Village Road, P.O. & P.S.- Shashtrinagar, Distict Dumka, Jharkhand. 5.The Forester, Shikari Para Forest Beat, having its office at Bandarjori Village Road, P.O. & P.S.- Shas trinagar, District Dumka, Jharkhand .......... Respondent(s) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate Ms. Poja Kumari, Advocate For the Resp.-State : A.C. to A.A.G-III 03/04.09.2025 Inspite of time granted vide order dated 04.08.2025, no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent State as yet. 2. It is settled principle of law as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill and another Vs. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi reported (1978) 1 SCC 405, that nothing can be added and subtracted in the impugned order by filing counter affidavit. 3. The present writ petition has been filed for the following relief(s): (i) For issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 11.03.2025 passed by the learned court of Revision Authority-cum- Secretary, Forest, Environment & Climate Change Department Government of Jharkhand (Annexure-7), in Revision Case No. 30 of 2023, whereby and whereunder the learned revisional court 2025:JHHC:26957 2 W.P.(C) No. 3824 of 2025 confirmed the order dated 11.04.2023 passed by the learned Appellate Authority-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Dumka in Confiscation Appeal No. 09/2022-23. (ii) For further issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 11.04.2023 passed by the learned court of Deputy Commissioner, Dumka (Annexure-6), in confiscation Appeal Case No.- 09/2022-23, whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court confirmed the order dated 22.10.2022 passed by the Officer-cum- Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka, confiscation proceeding 27 of 2022. (iii) For further issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly a writ of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 22.10.2022 passed by the learned court of Authorised Officer-cum- Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka (Annexure-5), in confiscation proceeding 27 of 2022, whereby and whereunder the petitioner vehicle bearing registration No. JH-04V-8455 has been ordered to be confiscated. (iv) Upon quashing of orders dated 11.03.2025, 11.04.2023, 22.10.2022 for further issuance of writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to forthwith release the seized vehicle bearing registration No. JH-04V-8455 in favour of the petitioner. 4. The brief fact of the case is as follows: i. Petitioner is the owner of Truck bearing registration no. JH-04V-8455. ii. On 25.05.2022 Challan bearing no. Z005641 and Z005644 issued to the petitioner for transportation of stone chips purchased by the petitioner from M/s Jayanti Stone Quarry of Village Talbandh, West Bengal. iii. On 26.05.2022 18 vehicles including the Petitioner’s truck were intercepted at Dumka- Rampurhat Road, for allegedly transporting stone chips without proper documentation. iv. On 27.05.2022 Complaint Case No. 1055 of 2022 arising 2025:JHHC:26957 3 W.P.(C) No. 3824 of 2025 out of the offence Report No. 17P dated 27.05.2022 was registered and copy of the same and seizure port has been sent to the authorized officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka through the Range Forest Officer, Hizla East Range to initiate the confiscation proceeding of the seized vehicle along with the seized stone chips or metalsand in pursuance there to Confiscation Case No. 27/2022 was initiated. v. On 22.10.2022 order was passed by the learned Authorized Officer-cum-Divisional Forest Officer, Dumka in an arbitrary and illegal manner confiscating the 18 vehicles along with seized materials, against which, being aggrieved, petitioner filed confiscation appeal no. 09/2022-23 before the learned Appellate Authority-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Dumka. vi. On 11.04.2023 the learned Appellate Authority –cum- Deputy Commissioner, Dumka dismissed the appeal vide order dated 11.04.2023, to which petitioner filed confiscation revision case no. 30/2023 before the learned Revision Authority-cum –Secretary, Forest Environment and Climate Change Dept., Govt. of Jharkhand. vii. On 11.03.2025 the learned Revision Authority-cum- Secretary, Forest, Environment and Climate Change Dept., Govt. of Jharkhand dismissed Revision case. 5. The order of confiscation has been challenged before this Court by the petitioner on the following grounds: i. Whether the commercial vehicle of the petitioner was carrying stone chips in violation of the provision of law? ii. Whether initiation of confiscation proceedings by the Forest Officer creates a bar upon the Courts to release the seized vehicle? iii. Whether the act of keeping a commercial vehicle under open 2025:JHHC:26957 4 W.P.(C) No. 3824 of 2025 sky would serve the purpose of the legislator? iv. Whether the respondent authorities be permitted to act at their whims and fancy without following the procedures laid down in law? v. Whether the order dated 11.03.2025,11.04.2023,22.10.2022 has been passed without application of judicial mind? vi. Whether the action of the respondent authorities is violative of Article 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India? vii. Whether the petition for release of the vehicle has been rejected in accordance with law/ 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. 6. 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”. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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-7), passed by the revisional authority in Revision Case No.30 of 2023, the order 2025:JHHC:26957 5 W.P.(C) No. 3824 of 2025 dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure-6) passed by the appellate authority in Confiscation Appeal Case No. 09 of 2022-23 and the order dated 22.10.2022 (Annexure-5) passed by the respondents in Confiscation Case No.27 of 2022, are perverse. 10. Accordingly, the above orders are hereby quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to release the vehicle forthwith. 11. Resultantly, the present writ petition stands allowed. 12. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) A.Mohanty