Sudhir Ghosh @ Sudir Ghosh vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 2288 Jhar

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                  Cr. Revision No. 951 of 2020
               1. Sudhir Ghosh @ Sudir Ghosh
               2. Rajesh Kumar Yadav                                    ....      ....Petitioners
                                               -Versus-
               The State of Jharkhand                                   ....      ....Opp. Party

               CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
                                                .......

For the Petitioners : - Mr. Shashi Kant Thakur, Adv.

              For the Opp. Party                : - Mr. Prabir Chatterjee, APP
                                                .....

The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsels for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities were good.

........

06/08.07.2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

The instant criminal revision petition has been filed for setting aside the order dated 14.09.2020 passed in Misc. Criminal Application No. 610/2020 and 606/2020 respectively and for release of the Tractor of the petitioner no.1 bearing Registration No. WB-46D-9048 and for the trailer of the petitioner no. 2 bearing Registration No. JH-17Q-2380 in connection with Pakuria P. S. Case No. 24 of 2020 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 376 of 2020 for the offence registered under Sections 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 9(i) and 13(i) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017.

The prayer for release of the said tractor and trailer has been rejected by the Court below vide order dated 14.09.2020 assigning the reason that under Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, the Deputy Commissioner is the proper authority for confiscation and as such, learned Magistrate has no jurisdiction to pass any order under Section 451 of the Cr. P. C.

Rule 11 (iv) and (v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 is quoted herebelow:

"11. Search, Seizure and Confiscation.-

(i)...................................................................................

(ii)...................................................................................

(iii) .................................................................................

(iv) Every officer making a seizure, under these rules shall prepare a list of minerals, tools, equipment, vehicles or any other article, so seized and deliver a copy thereof signed by him to the person found in possession of such minerals. Such officer shall keep such seized property under proper custody with proper official seal and with detailed information.

(v) Any minerals, tool, equipment, vehicle or anything seized shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the court of the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned district and shall be disposed of in accordance with direction of such court."

From mere perusal of the above provisions, it is evident that Deputy Commission has power to initiate and confiscate the vehicle used in the commission of crime under the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017.

It is settled law so far as jurisdiction is concerned that Magistrate gets ousted only, if under special rule, any proceeding for confiscation is initiated by the Authorized Officer. In the present case as has been submitted by the learned APP and it appears from the perusal of the records that no proceeding has been initiated for confiscation of tractor and trailer in question.

In view of the above fact, non release of tractor and trailer by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Pakur vide order dated 14.09.2020 passed in Misc. Criminal Application No. 610/2020 and 606/2020 respectively in connection with Pakuria P. S. Case No. 24 of 2020 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 376 of 2020 is, hereby, set aside.

The Court below is directed to pass an order under Section 451 of the Cr.P.C. The Court below shall also take into consideration the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283 by which final order shall be passed by the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order.

With the above observations and directions, the instant criminal revision stands allowed.

Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Court below forthwith.

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Kamlesh/