Page No.# 1/9 GAHC010176942026 2026:GAU-AS:12661 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4563/2026 AFSANA FURNITURE AND ANR REPRESENTED BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR ALAL UDDIN WARD NO 6 SAPTAHIK BAZAR DHEKIAJULIP O P S DHEKIAJULI DISTRICT SONITPUR ASSAM 784110 2: ALAL UDDIN S/O ASOR ALI VILLAGE MEDHICHUBURI PO RANGAGORA PS. DHEKIAJULI DISTRICT SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 78411 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE DHEKIAJULI MUNICIPAL BOARD SWAHID NAGARI DHEKIAJULI DISTRICT SONITPUR ASSAM 784110 REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN 3:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER SONITPUR WEST DIVISION PO TEZPUR DISTRICT SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 4:THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER DHEKIAJULI RANGE PO DHEKIAJULI DISTRICT SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 78411 Page No.# 2/9 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Sundi, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Ms. U. Das, Addl. Sr. GA, Assam : Mr. R. R. Gogoi, SC, Forest · Date on which Judgment was reserved : N/A · Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 02.09.2026 · Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative Part of the Judgment : Yes · Whether the full Judgment has been Pronounced : No JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL) Heard Mr. P. Sundi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1. I have also heard Mr. R. R. Gogoi, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners assailing the sealing of the Petitioners’ shop and factory as well as the seizure of the furnitures in the business premises of the Petitioner. It appears that the actions are taken on account of non- compliance to the provisions of the Assam Wood-Based Industries (Promotion and Development) Rules, 2022 (for short ‘the Rules of Page No.# 3/9 2022’) whereby for the purpose of establishing, operating and renewal of a secondary wood-based industrial unit, there is a requirement of registration. 3. This Court takes note of that vide a judgment and order dated 24.08.2026 in the case of Kahinoor Furniture House Vs. The State of Assam and 9 Others reported in 2026:GAU-AS:12282, this Court disposed of a batch of writ petitions holding inter alia at Paragraph No.39 that the Petitioners therein would come within the ambit of the definition “Secondary Wood-Based Industrial Unit” and in order to operate their business premises, the Petitioners would have to register themselves under the Rules of 2022. This Court further held that taking into account that the breach of the Rules of 2022 would not constitute a “forest offence” in terms with Section 3(5) of the Assam Forest Regulations, 1891 (for short, ‘the Regulation) the question of confiscation of the furnitures does not arise and if the goods cannot be confiscated, there cannot also be any seizure. Paragraph Nos. 31 to 39 of the said judgment in the case of Kahinoor Furniture House (supra) being relevant are reproduced herein under: “31. Section 3(5) of the Regulation defines the term 'forest offence'. The said definition is reproduced herein under: Page No.# 4/9 "3(5) “forest offence” means an offence punishable under this Regulation or any rule thereunder.’ 32. A perusal of the above definition would show that in order to be a forest offence, it has to be an offence punishable under the Regulation or any Rule thereunder. 33. Rule 17 of the Rules of 2022 do not stipulate the punishment, but rather mandates that breach of the Rules of 2022 would be punishable under the relevant provisions of the Regulation. A perusal of the Regulation would show the Regulation specifies specifically in the context of what offence what would be the punishment. Sections 24 and 25 of the Regulation stipulates punishment specific to the offences described therein. Section 33 of the Regulation though stipulates punishment, but the same is only with respect to infringement of Section 33 of the Regulation. Section 41 of the Regulation permitted the State Government to make attach punishment to the breach of the Rules framed under Section 40 of the Regulation. However, the Rules of 2022 are silent on the said aspect. Rather refers to the Regulation. Sections 58 and 59 of the Regulation do not prescribe any punishment for breach of the Rules framed under the Regulation. Therefore, from the above referred provisions, it is apparently clear that the Regulation do not provide any punishment for breach of the Rules or for that matter the breach to the Rules of 2022. 34. The above analysis would make it apparent that for the breach of the Page No.# 5/9 stipulations contained in the Rules of 2022, there is no punishment. Under such circumstances, as there is no punishment, any breach of the Rules of 2022 would not come within the ambit of ‘forest offence'. 35. The question therefore arises as to whether the Respondents in the Forest Department could have exercised the power of seizure and confiscation on account of the breach of the Rules of 2022. Section 49 of the Regulation empowers any Forest Officer not below the rank of a Forester or any Police Officer not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector of Police, the power of seizure of property which is liable to confiscation subject to having reasons to believe that a forest offence had been committed. The power to confiscate is at Section 49(4) of the Regulation which is also subject to the satisfaction that a forest offence had been committed. Sub-Section (1) and (4) of Section 49 of the Regulation being relevant are reproduced herein under: “49. Seizure of property liable to confiscation- (1) When there is reason to believe that a forest offence has been committed in respect of any forest produce, such produce together with all tools, boats, motorised boats, vessels, cattle, carts, rafts, machineries, vehicles, trucks, ropes, chains or any other implements, articles or materials used in the commission of such offence may be seized by any Forest Officer not below the rank of a Forester or any Police Officer not below the rank of a Sub- Inspector of Police. (2) …………. (3) ………… (4) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (5) and (6), where the Authorised Officer upon production before him of the property seized or Page No.# 6/9 upon receipt of a report about seizure, as the case may be, and after such personal inspection or verification as he may deem fit and necessary, is satisfied that a forest offence has been committed in respect thereof, he may by order in writing and for reasons to be recorded therein, confiscate the forest produce so seized together with all tools, vehicles, cattle, trucks, motorised boats, boats, carts, machineries, rafts, vessels, ropes, chains or any other implements or articles used in committing such offence. A copy of the order of confiscation shall, without any undue delay, be forwarded to the Circle Conservator of Forests of the Circle in which the forest produce has been seized and the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the offence on account of which the seizure has been made.” 36. This Court also finds equally important to take note of Section 51 of the Regulation which stipulates when forest produce, tools etc. are liable to confiscation. Section 51 of the Regulation being relevant is reproduced herein below:- “51. Forest produce, tools, etc., when liable to confiscation-(1) When any person is convicted of a forest-offence, all forest-produce which is not the property of the Government and in respect of which such offence has been committed, and all tools, boats, carts and cattle used in the commission of such offence, shall be liable, by order of the convincing Court, to confiscation. (2) Such confiscation may be in addition to any other punishment prescribed for such offence.” From a perusal of the above Section, it would show when a person in convicted of a "forest offence, the forest produce, tools etc. can be confiscated. 37. In the above backdrop of the above analysis, it is importance to note that Page No.# 7/9 breach of the Rules of 2022 being not a forest offence, the question of seizure as well as confiscation of the furnitures on the ground of non-registration or non- compliance to Rule 15 of the Rules of 2022 do not arise. Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the action of the Respondents to seize the furnitures from the business premises of the Petitioners and initiate confiscation proceedings cannot be sustained in law. The seizure of the furnitures of the Petitioners by the Respondent Forest Officials are declared illegal and unauthorized. The consequential actions for initiation of the confiscation proceedings are also declared illegal and void. 38. It is also of relevance to note that the power to seal a business premises is a statutory power and in absence of such specific powers being conferred upon the authorities, the power exercised to seal the Petitioners’ business premises is illegal and unauthorized. Moreover, without any forest offence being committed, the question of taking action for sealing the Petitioners’ business premises is not only unauthorized but also without jurisdiction. The above decides the third point for determination. FOURTH POINT FOR DETERMINATION 39. The fourth point for determination is as to what relief or reliefs the parties are entitled to. This Court disposes of the present batch of writ petitions with the following observations and directions:- (A) The Petitioners’ business premises would come within the ambit of the definition "Secondary Wood Based Industrial Unit". (B) The Petitioners in order to operate their business premises would have to register themselves under the Rules of 2022. Page No.# 8/9 (C) The sealing of the Petitioners business premises is illegal and unauthorized, and accordingly, directions issued to forthwith de-seal the business premises of the Petitioners in the batch of writ petitions. (D) The seizure of the furnitures from the Petitioners’ business premises was illegal and unauthorized, and accordingly, the seizure so made is declared to be illegal and unauthorized. The Respondents in the Forest Department are directed to forthwith return the seized furnitures. (E) The initiation of the confiscation proceedings against the Petitioners are illegal and unauthorized, and accordingly, the confiscation proceedings initiated against the Petitioners are set aside and quashed. (F) The applications filed by the Petitioners seeking registration be processed in terms with Rule 8(A) of the Rules of 2022 within the timelines stipulated therein. (G) No costs.” 4. In the instant case, the Petitioners are also similarly situated and accordingly, the Petitioners are therefore entitled to similar reliefs. 5. Accordingly, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ petition with the following observations and directions: (i) The business carried out by the Petitioners would come within the definition of “Secondary Wood Based Industrial Unit”. Page No.# 9/9 (ii) In order to operate the Petitioners’ business, the Petitioners have to be registered under the Rules of 2022. (iii) The sealing of the Petitioners’ business premises is illegal and unauthorized and accordingly, directions are issued to forthwith de- seal the Petitioners’ business premises. (iv) The seizure of the furnitures from the Petitioners’ business premises was also illegal and unauthorized and accordingly, the seizure so made is declared to be illegal and unauthorized. The Respondents in the Forest Department are directed to forthwith return the seized furnitures. (v) The applications filed by the Petitioners seeking registration be processed in terms with Rule 8(A) of the Rules of 2022 within the timelines stipulated therein. (vi) If any confiscation proceedings have in the meantime been initiated, which the Petitioners claim to be unaware off, the same is also declared to be non est. (vii) There shall be no order as to costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant Bijoy Saha Digitally signed by Bijoy Saha Date: 2026.09.02 18:40:51 +05'30'