Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court’s Order, Remits Rosewood Seizure Case for Reexamination

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court of India has set aside the order passed by the High Court of Kerala, which directed the release of illicitly seized rosewood logs and a lorry. The judgment, delivered by Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Abhay S. Oka, emphasized the importance of disclosing post-seizure developments to the court.

“The matter does not require examination in detail by this Court at this stage, for the reason that neither the lorry nor the rosewood logs are available as both have been sold by the state,” observed Justice Bindal in the verdict.

The case revolved around the seizure of a lorry carrying rosewood logs, found beneath bananas and rice husk. The seized material was declared government property, and after a series of legal proceedings, the High Court ordered the return of the logs and the lorry. However, the appellant raised concerns over the ownership and legality of the seizure, pointing out that the logs were improperly transported state property.

In the judgment, the court highlighted the failure of the appellant to inform the High Court about the post-seizure developments, including the sale of the logs and the lorry. The court stated that the “lapse on the part of the state to apprise the High Court of the true and up-to-date facts at the time of final hearing” had a significant impact on the case.

Consequently, the Supreme Court remitted the matter back to the High Court for reexamination, allowing the respondents the possibility of receiving the amount collected from the sale of the logs and the lorry. The High Court was also directed to consider awarding interest on the amount collected.

While disposing of the appeal, the bench observed, “The appeal is disposed off accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.”

The verdict sheds light on the importance of presenting accurate and up-to-date information to the court throughout the legal process, ensuring the fair and just resolution of cases involving seized property.

Date of Decision: August 09, 2023.

ASSISTANT WILD LIFE WARDEN & ANR. K. MOIDEEN & ANR.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/09-Aug-2023-SC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News