iqbal Vs. K.S. Sai Baba, I.F.S. Authorised Officer and Dy. Conservator of Forests

.....to the portuguese family law, that is applicable within the state of goa, and had set up their matrimonial home at fatorda, margao. it is the portuguese family law which would apply, in so far as their matrimonial relationship is concerned. the fact that the petitioner and the respondent underwent a hindu marriage ceremony at a later point of time, would not have the effect of the parties becoming subject to the provisions of the hindu marriage act. the hindu marriage act not having been extended to the state of goa as on the date of their marriage i.e., 26.12.2002 the said act and the provisions thereunder would not apply. further, a suit for divorce by parties governed by the portuguese family law within the state of goa, can file the same in the court of domicile within goa or in the court having jurisdiction over the place where the plaintiff resides (also within the state of goa). it cannot be construed that a plaintiff who is residing outside the state of goa could also file a suit or petition for divorce outside the state of goa, as in the present case, in a place where he or she is residing outside goa. the courts, in the rest of india, would have no jurisdiction to entertain suit (petition) under the provisions of the portuguese family law pertaining to divorce. the laws relating to succession and marriage might not be the same all over the country and different areas in the state might have different laws in respect of those matters. though the respondent is now living at belgaum, on the premise that if there was a possibility of reconciliation, her domicile would be that of the petitioner at goa, it can safely be said that a suit by the respondent would lie in the state of goa in terms of article 5 before the court of domicile. in view of this, it can be said that the portuguese family law would be the court of domicile, within the state of goa. impugned order was quashed. - ' 2. thereafter the authorised officer the deputy conservator of..........the authorised officer and deputy conservator of forests is directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner within 15 days from today and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, keeping in view the rulings of this court and supreme court on the subject.' 2. thereafter the authorised officer the deputy conservator of forests made an order on 3-5-1990 to the following effect : 'brief facts of the case : forest mobile squads, bangalore and kolar along with the staff of hoskote range, while waiting near budigere cross of hoskote-devancahalli road, as they received reliable information regarding smuggling of sandalwood, tried to stop the truck no. cnt 9362 coming from bangalore side at about 6-30 a.m. on 6-12-1989. the staff chased the truck and stopped it as the driver did not stop it in his first instance. three inmates of the truck including the driver were arrested. the truck was having a national permit. the documents available with the driver are for transporting gunny bags from kerala to ahmedabad, whereas on examination it was found that the lorry was loaded with sandalwood in huge quantity of 6200 kgs covered with few gunny bags on the top. the driver informed that the sandal was loaded at medimallasandra of hoskote taluk for transportation to new delhi. the entire sandalwood was the illicit one without any valid permit and documents. a case was registered under karnataka forest act s. 71a the vehicle along with the sandalwood was produced before the authorised officer and the deputy conservator of forests, bangalore rural division, bangalore. on 13-12-1989 sri lqbal s/o. abdul sattar had filed a petition for interim release of the vehicle during the pendency of the proceedings before this court. after careful examination of the contents of the petition the following order is passed :