1. Prayag Chauodhary, aged about 55 years S/O Jawahir Chaudhary 2. Hardul Chaudhary, aged v. 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Garhwa, At, P.O. and
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr.) No. 818 of 2024 1. Prayag Chauodhary, aged about 55 years S/O Jawahir Chaudhary 2. Hardul Chaudhary, aged about 44 years, S/o Jatu Chaudhary, both are R/o Village Bodara, PO & PS- Manjhiaon, District- Garhwa, Jharkhand. ..... … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Garhwa, At, P.O. and P.S. Garhwa, District-Garhwa, Jharkhand. 3. Officer-in-Charge, Manjhiaon Police Station, P.O. and P.S. Manjhiaon, District- Garhwa. 4. The Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa, P.O. & P.S.- Garhwa, Dist. Garhwa. 5. The Principal Secretary Cum Mines Commissioner, Department of Mines & Minerals, State of Jharkhand, At/ P.O. + P.S. Dhurwa, Ranchi. 6. The District Mines Officer, Garhwa, At/ P.O. + P.S.- Garhwa, District-Garhwa, Jahrkhand. -------- ..... … Respondents
Legal Reasoning
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ : : ------ 03/ 21.10.2024 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, Advocate. Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, A.C. to A.A.G.-II. For the Petitioners For the State learned counsel for the respondents-State. 2. Prayer in this petition is made for quashing of the order dated 28.01.2023, passed by the learned revisional court in Criminal Revision No. 93 of 2022, whereby, the revision has been dismissed and the order of the learned A.C.J.M., Garhwa dated 17.11.2022, passed in connection with Manjhiaon P.S. Case No. 70 of 2022 has been affirmed, whereby, the release of the tractors of the petitioners bearing registration number JH- 14-G-6547 and JH-14-H-7369 respectively has been rejected, the case is pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M., Garhwa. Prayer is also made for quashing of the order dated 30.09.2022, in which, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa has instituted confiscation proceeding in confiscation case Nos. 25 and 26 of 2022-23, -1- pending in that court. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the owners of the tractors bearing registration number JH- 14-G-6547 and JH-14-H-7369 respectively. He submits that the learned trial court has rejected the prayer for release of the said vehicles only on the ground that the confiscation case is pending with the Deputy Commissioner. He submits that the said vehicles were seized on the allegation of illegal transportation of sand. He further submits that the case has been registered under Sections 379, 411 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Rule-54(1) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004. He submits that the vehicles are commercial in nature and if the same are kept in open space, the said vehicles will be destroyed day by day. He then submits that Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 has been declared ultra vires by the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 02.07.2024 passed in W.P. (C) No.6788 of 2023. He further submits that the confiscation can only be made by a court, who is competent to take cognizance in the light of sub-section 4A of the Section 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State submits that the said vehicles were illegally used in carrying the sand, however, he does not dispute that Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 has been declared ultra vires by the Division Bench of this Court. 5. The vehicles in question are commercial and it is of no use to keep such vehicles at the police station for a long period. This aspect of the matter has been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Versus State of Gujarat reported in (2002) 10 SCC 283. 6. In view of the above, it appears that Rule 11(V) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and -2- Storage) Rules, 2017, has itself been declared ultra vires by the division bench of this court by order dated 02.07.2024 passed in W.P. (C) No.6788 of 2023. In view of sub-section 4A of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 the Court having the power of taking cognizance or can confiscate the vehicle in question. 7. Rule 54(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 is amended by Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Amendment Rules, 2017, which reads as under:- ^^;fn fdlh okgu dk dksbZ pkyd y?kq [kfut dks ifjogu djrs le; l{ke inkf/kdkjh vFkok funs’kd] [kku vFkok vij funs’kd] [kku vFkok mi funs’kd] [kku vFkok ftyk@lgk;d [kuu inkf/kdkjh vFkok lekgrkZ vFkok lekgrkZ ;k jkT; ljdkj n~okjk izkf/kd‘r fdlh inkf/kdkjh dks izi= ^,e* vFkok >kj[k.M [kfut leuqnku fu;ekoyh] 2004 ds vUrxZr QkeZ Mh esa ifjogu pkyku fn[kkus esa vlQy jgrk gS vFkok fujh{k.k ls bUdkj djrk gS] rks mls vf/kdre 01 o’kZ dh dSn vFkok [kfut ewY; dh nksxquh jkf’k ds cjkcj n.M vFkok nksuksa ,d lkFk n.M fn;k tk ldrk gS rFkk nwljh ,oa rhljh ckj oS/k ifjogu pkyku izLrqr ugha fd, tkus ij mijksDr ds vfrfjDr n.M dh jkf’k (cid:216)e’k% 50]000-00 …ipkl gtkj :i;s ,oa 1]00]000@ …,d yk[k‰ :i;s gksxhA tk¡p djus okys inkf/kdkjh n~okjk voS/k ifjogu djrs ik;s tkus ij okgu dks [kfut lfgr tIr fd;k tk,xk rFkk ftls fdlh ljdkjh izfr"Bku esa vFkok LFkkfu; Fkkuk izkax.k esa lqjf{kr j[kk tk,xkA l{ke inkf/kdkjh n~okjk voS/k ifjogudrkZ ds mijksDr n.M ’kqYd ,oa bl vk’k; dk ca/k i= …Bond Paper‰ lefiZr fd, tkus ij fd U;k;ky; n~okjk uksfVl fn, tkus ij mifLFkr gksaxs] okgu dks [kfut lfgr NksM+k tk ldrk gS] ijUrq voS/k ifjogudrkZ ij fu;ekuqdwy dkjZokbZ gsrq bldh lwpuk U;k;kf;d n.Mkf/kdkjh dks nh tk,xhA ca/k i= dk izi= funs’kd] [kku n~okjk vyx ls ifjpkfyr fd;k tk,xkA 8. On perusal of Rule 54(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Amendment Rules, 2017, it transpires that the minerals can be released on payment of double amount of the cost of the minerals, to be deposited before the competent authority. However, in the case in hand, the petitioners are not claiming the minerals. 9. Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 has been declared ultra vires by the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 02.07.2024 passed in W.P. (C) No.6788 of 2023, as such, the confiscation proceeding initiated by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa, is not sustained in the eyes of law. As such, the order dated 30.09.2022, in which, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa has -3- issued confiscation proceeding in confiscation case Nos. 25 and 26 of 2022-23, is hereby quashed. 10. In view of the above, the order dated 28.01.2023, passed by the learned revisional court in Criminal Revision No. 93 of 2022 and the order dated 17.11.2022, passed in connection with Manjhiaon P.S. Case No. 70 of 2022, are hereby, quashed. 11. So far as the release of the vehicles are concerned, the same shall be released in favour of the petitioners on their undertaking on the following terms and conditions:- (i) The petitioners shall furnish an indemnity bond to the satisfaction of the court below. (ii) One of the surety must be a resident and owner of a commercial vehicle of District Garhwa (Jharkhand). (iii) That the petitioners shall not sale, mortgage or transfer the ownership of the vehicles on hire purchase agreement or mortgage or in any manner. (iv) They shall not change or tamper with the identification of the vehicles in any manner. (v) They shall produce the vehicles as and when directed by the Trial Court or before the confiscating authority. 12. The aforesaid conditions are the subject to the final result of the criminal proceeding. 13. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ
Decision
petition is allowed and disposed of. Amitesh/- (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) -4-