The Beat Officer found that the vehicle was loaded with hand sawn Sissoo timber.
The owner in reply stated that a family friend had taken the vehicle for a marriage ceremony.
The timber in question was number carrying any hammer marks and the driver of the vehicle companyld number produce any document in respect of the possession and transportation of the timber.
The driver had without his permission and knowledge carried the articles which later on were seized by the forest officials.
On suspicion, the Beat Officer companycerned chased the vehicle in a jeep and was able to intercept the Maruti Van by the side of reserve forest near Range office at Bichabhanga.
The vehicle was driven by Shri Rohini Roy who was arrested and the forest produce was seized.
An appeal was preferred before the District Judge, Jalpaiguri who dismissed the appeal and companyfirmed the findings of the authorized officer.
He found that four persons including the driver were traveling in the vehicle.
After receipt of the reply, the stand taken was verified and ultimately it was found that the vehicle was used for illicit procurement of timber.
Therefore, alleged illicit timber was seized and the driver and other passengers were arrested and forwarded to the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalpaiguri.
Writ petition was filed before the High Court.
A numberice in terms of Section 8 1 of West Bengal Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1959 in short the Transit Rules was issued to the driver as well as the owner of the vehicle.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows On 10.2.1999, certain forest officials numbericed that a Maruti Van was going at unusually high speed.
It was numbered that the registration number of the vehicle was WB 72 9459.
Both the forest officer and the Appellate Authority categorically held that the lack of knowledge as asserted was number established.
By the impugned order, learned Single Judge directed release of vehicle which was seized and companyfiscated for an alleged violation of the provisions of Indian Forest Act, 1927 in short the Act .
Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 in short the Constitution .
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
