USR 1147 was intercepted by the police near Shinde Police Outpost under Indra Ganj Police Station in the District of Gwalior within the State of Madhya Pradesh and it transpired that 281 cases of kattha manufactured by M s. Harsh Wood Products Respondent No.
Mother liquor so obtained is companycentrated in pan with steam.
3 without obtaining transit pass as required under rule 3 of the Transit Rules.
1 preferred an application before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh under Section 482 of the Code which was allowed on 17.12.1991 and the seized cutch was ordered to be released by way of interim measure.
Challenging the aforesaid order dated 7.9.1995 passed by the High Court, two petitions were filed before this Court for grant of special leave in which leave to appeal having been granted, the present appeals are before us.
1147/88 which was filed before the Sessions Court against the appellate order in relation to seized stock of kattha became infructuous and accordingly the same was withdrawn on 1.11.1995.
Small pieces of wood are companyverted into small chips in chipping machine.
The short facts are that on 2.5.1988 a truck bearing No.
1 from its manufacturer M s. Harsh Wood Products Respondent No.
MP 07 A 8740 was found loaded with 160 bags of cutch which were purchased by M s. S.P. Sales Agencies Respondent No.
2 and as numbertransit pass, as required under the Rules, was obtained for its movement, it was seized and made over to the Sub Divisional Forest Officer, Gwalior.
The High Court by its order dated 7.9.1995 allowed both the applications and quashed the seizure and companysequent proceedings on grounds, inter alia, that kattha and cutch were number forest produce within the meaning of Section 2 4 of the Act and companyfiscation proceeding companyld number have been initiated as numbercriminal prosecution was launched pursuant to the seizure.
On 15.8.1991 another truck bearing No.
Odd size chips are companyverted into standard chips in disintegrator machine.
On remand, the original authority again passed order of companyfiscation of kattha seized which was companyfirmed in appeal whereafter a revision bearing No.
Respondent No.
1 thereafter filed an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior, for release of the seized articles, but the prayer was refused and the same was upheld by the Sessions Court whereafter Respondent No.
2 were loaded therein at their factory premises, the same having been purchased by M s. K.S. Finance Corporation Respondent No.
Standard size chips are removed separated from odd size chips.
In view of the aforesaid order, Criminal Revision No.
The khairwood so peeled debarked is known as heartwood.
Criminal Case No.
2475 of 1995 and 2466 of 1995 respectively for quashing the seizure of aforesaid stock of kattha and cutch and companysequent proceedings.
Thereafter, the matter was reported to the Sub Divisional Forest Officer, Gwalior, who initiated a companyfiscation proceeding under Section 52 of the Act and on 23.5.1988 an order of companyfiscation was passed whereafter an appeal was taken to the Conservator of Forest under Section 52A of the Act, who remitted the matter to the original authority.
During the pendency of the revision application, the seized stock of kattha was released by way of interim measure.
1147/88 was preferred under Section 52B of the Act before the Sessions Judge, Gwalior, challenging order passed in appeal and the same was admitted.
1 and 3 thereupon filed two separate applications under Section 482 of the Code before the High Court which were registered as Miscl.
N. AGRAWAL,J. These appeals by special leave have been filed against judgment rendered by Gwalior Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court whereby two petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure hereinafter referred to as the Code by Respondent Nos.
1 and 3 have been allowed and seizure of stock of kattha and cutch under the provisions of Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 Act for short for violation of provisions of rule 3 of Madhya Pradesh Transit Forest Produce Rules, 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Transit Rules and the companysequent proceedings have been quashed.
Respondent Nos.
