<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1984 (3) TMI 426 - Orissa High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192592</link>
    <description>The general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure on interim custody and disposal of seized property yield to the Orissa Forest Act where that special statute contains a complete scheme for seizure, interim release, confiscation, appeal, revision, and disposal of vehicles and forest produce involved in forest offences. Because the Forest Act specifically regulates these matters and no express provision preserves the Magistrate&#039;s concurrent jurisdiction, the Code cannot be invoked to release a truck seized in connection with a forest offence. The Magistrate therefore lacked jurisdiction to order release, and the refusal to release the vehicle was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jun 2017 12:24:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=471253" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (3) TMI 426 - Orissa High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192592</link>
      <description>The general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure on interim custody and disposal of seized property yield to the Orissa Forest Act where that special statute contains a complete scheme for seizure, interim release, confiscation, appeal, revision, and disposal of vehicles and forest produce involved in forest offences. Because the Forest Act specifically regulates these matters and no express provision preserves the Magistrate&#039;s concurrent jurisdiction, the Code cannot be invoked to release a truck seized in connection with a forest offence. The Magistrate therefore lacked jurisdiction to order release, and the refusal to release the vehicle was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192592</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>