S.74 Kerala Forest Act Protects Acts Done By Officials In Good Faith, Doesn't Grant Unbridled Power Of Seizure: High Court

“….if the protection under Section 74 of the Act 1961, is absolute any mischief and shabby actions of the forest officer which would result in unliquidated/ liquidated damages to the person affected could not be addressed. Therefore, blanket protection under the caption “good faith” cannot be granted to the forest officers.”

The original suit from which the appeal arose was filed for return of the machineries seized by the Forest Range Officer on the allegation that those were involved in a crime and for damages that arose on account of loss of rent on the machines. The trail court set aside the confiscation proceedings as illegal. The Court further directed the defendants to pay the plaintiff amount towards loss of rent and loss of value of machinery due to deterioration.

The defendants challenged the trial court order by arguing that they were protected under Section 74 of the Act As per them, they acted in good faith and seized the machinery after they received an information that Irul timber illegally cut from the forest was being converted to small pieces in the mill from where the machinery was seized.

The High Court observed that forest officers cannot claim protection under Section 74 of the Act, if they do acts after blatantly disregarding the ordinary care and action and with wrong or malicious intent. Justice A. Badharudeen clarified that the statutory protection is not a shied for actions done without rational application of cognitive faculty. The Court further held that when the seizure and confiscation was found to be illegal and was set aside, protection under Section 74 of the Act cannot be claimed for such acts.

The Court added that if such illegal acts are given the protection of Section 74, the person affected by such acts will be left without any remedy to compensate their losses.

The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

Counsel for the Appellants: Adv. Nagaraj Narayanan (Spl GP)

Counsel for the Respondent: Advocates K. M. Sathyanatha Menon, T. S. Jibu

Case No: RFA No. 389 of 2003

Case Title: State of Kerala and Others v V. P. Aboobacker

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 89