Patna High Court
Md. ParvezversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that without proof of a valid Section 30 notification, the district court must first verify its existence before proceeding under Section 33, and therefore the bail application was disposed.
Summary
The petitioner, Md Parvez, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a forest case alleging that he had lawfully purchased forest land and constructed on it, relying on a registered sale deed. The prosecution contended that he had contravened Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989 by clearing and building on protected forest land, thereby violating the constitutional mandate of Article 48A. The High Court examined the FIR and noted that the forest officials had not specified the date of the notification required under Section 30, which is essential to determine the applicability of the prohibition. Consequently, the Court directed the District Court to first issue a notice to the Divisional Forest Officer to verify the existence and validity of the Section 30 notification before taking any action under Section 33. In the absence of such verification, the Court modified the earlier order and disposed of the bail application without granting pre‑arrest bail. The decision underscores the need for procedural compliance in invoking forest protection provisions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is liable under Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989.
- Whether the lack of a recorded notification under Section 30 precludes proceeding against the petitioner.
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted in the absence of clear statutory breach.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 48A
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- forest law
- Section 30
- Section 33
- Indian Forest Act
- Article 48A
- protected forest
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10343 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2014 Thana- FOREST (GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL)
District- Gaya
======================================================
Md. Parvez Son of Md. Jafir Mian Resident of village- Bhadeja, Ps- Mofassil,
Dist- Gaya At Present 4 A.G.J. Khan Road, Alhayat Residency Block No. F
30 Floor room No. 304, Mahidra Service Center, Ps- Tapasia, Kalkatta, West
Bengal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 06-05-2026 Heard Mr. Praveen Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Ram Bilash Roy
Raman, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Forest Case No. 22 of 2014, registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 33(1)(C) of the Indian Forest (Bihar
Amendment) Act, 1989.
3. The prosecution story in brief is that the petitioner
had purchased forest land and made construction over the said
land.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10343 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
2/5
been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that
the father of the petitioner had purchased the land through
registered sale deed. The document relating to sale deed is valid.
No offence under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act is made
out against the petitioner. On these grounds, petitioner seeks to
be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation
made in the FIR, it appears that petitioner has not only violated
the provision of Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Forest Act,
1989, at the same time, the mandate of Article 48 (A) of the
constitution of India has also been defeated. The forest officials,
in the FIR, have not given the date of notification issued under
Section 30 of the Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989.
7. Sections 30 and 33 of the Indian Forest Act are
reproduced hereinafter:
"30. Power to issue notification reserving
trees, etc.
The [State Government] [[Substituted by
A.O.1950[Provincial Government].]] may, by notification
in the Official Gazette,
(a) declare any trees or class of trees in a
protected forest to be reserved from a date fixed by the
notification;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10343 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
3/5
(b) declare that any portion of such forest
specified in the notification shall be closed for such term,
not exceeding thirty years, as the [State Government]
[[Substituted by A.O.1950[Provincial Government].]]
thinks fit, and that the rights of private persons, if any, over
such portion shall be suspended during such term, provided
that the remainder of such forest be sufficient, and in a
locality reasonably convenient, for the due exercise of the
rights suspended in the portion so closed; or
(c) prohibit, from a date fixed as aforesaid, the
quarrying of stone, or the burning of lime or charcoal, or
the collection or subjection to any manufacturing process,
or removal of, any forest-produce in any such forest, and
the breaking up or clearing for cultivation, for building, for
herding cattle or for any other purpose, of any land in any
such forest.
33. Penalties for acts in contravention of
notification under section 30 or of rules under section 32.
(1) Any person who commits any of the
following offences, namely:
(a) fells, girdles, lops, taps or burns any tree
reserved under section 30, or strips off the bark or leaves
from, or otherwise damages, any such tree;
(b) contrary to any prohibition under section
30, quarries any stone, or burns any lime or charcoal or
collects, subjects to any manufacturing process, or removes
any forest-produce;
(c) contrary to any prohibition under section
30, breaks up or clears for cultivation or any other purpose
any land in any protected forest;
(d) sets fire to such forest, or kindles a fire
without taking all reasonable precautions to prevent its
spreading to any tree reserved under section 30, whether
standing, fallen or felled, or to any closed portion of such
forest;
(e) leaves burning any fire kindled by him in the
vicinity of any such tree or closed portion;
(f) fells any tree or drags any timber so as to
damage any tree reserved as aforesaid;
(g) permits cattle to damage any such tree;
(h) infringes any rule made under section
32;shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10343 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
4/5
may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to
five hundred rupees, or with both.
(2) Whenever fire is caused wilfully or by gross
negligence in a protected forest, the "State Government"
[[Substituted byA.O.1950, for "Provincial Government.]]
may, notwithstanding that any penalty has been inflicted
under this section, direct that in such forest or any portion
thereof the exercise of any right of pasture or to forest-
produce shall be suspended for such period as it thinks fit.
[Bihar".- In its application to the State of Bihar,
in Section 33,(i) sub-S. (1), for the words shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend
to six months or with fine which may extend to five hundred
rupees or with both, substitute shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a minimum term of six months which may
extend to two years or with minimum fine of one hundred
rupees which may extend to five thousand rupees or with
both. The offence under this section shall be cognizable and
non-bailable.Bihar Act 9 of 1990, Section 3 (w.e.f. 10-9-
1990).
(ii) for sub-S. (2), substitute the following sub-
section, namely:
(2) Whenever in a protected forest
(a) fire is caused wilfully or by gross
negligence, or
(b) theft of forest-produce occurs and such theft
is, in the opinion of the State Government, on such a scale
as to be likely to imperil the future yield of such forest, the
State Government may, notwithstanding that any penalty
has been inflicted under this section or under any other law
for any act referred to in clause (a) or clause (b), direct that
in such forest or any portion thereof the exercise of any
right of pasture or to forest-produce shall be suspended,
(i) in the circumstances mentioned in clause (a),
for such period as it thinks fit,
(ii) in the circumstances mentioned in clause
(b), for a period not exceeding four years.Bihar and Orissa
Act 9 of 1935, Section 3 (w.e.f. 23-10-1935)."
8. Article 48 (A) of the Constitution of India is
reproduced hereinafter:
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10343 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
5/5
"48A. Protection and improvement of
environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life
[After article 48 of the Constitution, the
following article shall be inserted Constitution (Forty-
Second Amendment) Act, 1976]
The State shall endeavour to protect and
improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and
wild life of the country."
9. In absence of any information in the prosecution
case regarding the date of notification in accordance with
Section 30 of the Indian Forest Act, the learned District Court is
directed to first issue notice to the Divisional Forest Officer,
Gaya and verify, as to whether, time as prescribed under Section
30 of the Act is still continuing from the date of said notification
then no action is required to be taken against the petitioner, or in
case, the time has expired, learned District Court may pass order
considering the provision of Section 33 of the Indian Forest
(Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989.
10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 04.11.2025
passed by the learned District Court is modified.
11. The present bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…