Rohit Kumar …. … v. 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Godda, Jharkhand. 3. The Superintendent
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No.921 of 2023 ---- Rohit Kumar …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Godda, Jharkhand. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Godda, Jharkhand. 4. The District Mining Officer, Godda, Jharkhand. 5. The Officer-in-Charge, Poraiyahat, Godda, Jharkhand. …. …. Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Petitioner For the Respondents
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Pankaj Kr. Choudhary, Adv. : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Sr. S.C.-III 03/Dated: 12th January, 2024 ---- 1. 2. Heard the parties. The present writ petition has been filed for following reliefs:- (i) For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, Order/orders, direction/directions or a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure-2) passed in Confiscation Case No. 28/2023-24 whereby the seized vehicles of the petitioner have been confiscated by the court of the Deputy Commissioner, Godda. (ii) For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, Order/orders, direction/directions or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to release the three Trucks bearing Registration No. BR-09GA- 6322, Registration No. BR-09GA- 7022 and Registration No. BR-09GA-8544 of the petitioner seized in connection with Poraiyahat P.S. Case No. 59 of 2023 dated 20.03.2023, now case is pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Godda. 3. It appears that criminal case has been lodged being Poraiyahat P.S. Case No.59 of 2023 registered under Sections 379, 414 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, under Rules 4/54 of the Jharkhand Minor Minerals Concessions Rules, 2004, under Section 4 of the MMDR Act and under Rules 9/13 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation & Storage) Rules. 4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trucks (bearing registration No.BR-09GA-6322, Registration No.BR.09GA- 7022 and Registration No.BR-09GA-8544) in question have been seized by the police. The order of confiscation has been passed by the Deputy 2 W.P.(Cr.) No.921 of 2023 Commissioner, Godda in Confiscation Case No.28 of 2023-24 vide order dated 29.08.2023 (order is impugned in the present criminal writ petition) which is not as per the law and no such power is vested to the Deputy Commissioner. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment dated 13.09.2023 passed in W.P.(Cr.) No.502 of 2023 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court and has submitted that only the criminal court taking cognizance of the offence is competent to pass the order of confiscation and the Deputy Commissioner has no such power. For that purpose, paragraph Nos.7 to 13 of the said judgment are quoted herein below:- “7. Sub-section (4-A) of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 is quoted hereinbelow:
Decision
“21. (4-A) Any mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing seized under sub-section (4), shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the court competent to take cognizance of the offence under sub-section (1) and shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such court.” 8. Looking into the above provision, it is crystal clear that any mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle can be confiscated by an order of the court competent to take cognizance. 9. Section 22 of the said Act speaks of cognizance of offence, which is quoted hereinbelow: “22. No court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any rules made thereunder except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government.” 10. Looking into the above provision, it appears that the cognizance can be taken only on the complaint. 11. Further, Section 30-B of the said Act, 1957 speaks of constitution of Special Courts and Section 30-C of the said Act, 1957 speaks of Special Courts' power. 12. Rule 54(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 is amended by Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Amendment Rules, 2017, which is quoted hereinbelow: ;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 e~Y; 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 Øe'k% 50]000-00 ¼ipkl gtkj :i;s ,oa 1]00]000@ ¼,d yk[k½ :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= ¼Bond Paper½ 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 3 W.P.(Cr.) No.921 of 2023 13. In view of the above facts, it is clear that the impugned orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Simdega is not in accordance with law. If a particular Act is there and certain procedure are prescribed therein, the same is required to be followed, which is lacking in the case in hand.” 6. In view of the law declared by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court that the Deputy Commissioner is not a competent authority to pass the order of confiscation. Accordingly, the order dated 29.08.2023 (Annexure-2) passed by the Deputy Commissioner in Confiscation Case No. 28/2023-24 in connection with Poraiyahat P.S. Case No.59 of 2023 is, hereby, quashed and set-aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned court below who has taken cognizance, to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 7. 8. Accordingly, this criminal writ petition stands allowed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the court below who has taken cognizance of the offence. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Amar/- Uploaded