Patna High Court
M/S Ashutosh Traders Through Its ... vs The State Of Bihar Through The Principal ... on 30 January, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.433 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-854 Year-2022 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Shankar Yadav
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home Dep. Gov. of Bihar,
Patna & Ors.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 564 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2022 Thana- LAXMIPUR District- Jamui
======================================================
Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Kumar Singh
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar & Ors.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1354 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2024 Thana- DANIYAWAN District- Patna
======================================================
Nitish Kumar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar Through Chief Secretary, Government Of Bihar, Patna &
Ors.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2388 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Bhojpur
======================================================
M/s Ashutosh Traders through its Proprietor Dharmendra Kumar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Through the Principal Sect., Mines And Geology Dept. ,
Govt. of Bihar, Patna & Ors.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
2/15
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 433 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raghwanand, GA 11
Mr. Rajnish Shandilya, AC to GA 11
(In Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 564 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sunil Kr. Mandal, SC 3
Ms. M. Kumari, AC to SC 3
(In Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1354 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushpendra Priyedarshi, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Umesh Narayan Dubey, AC to GP 27
(In Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2388 of 2024)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. S.C 25
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 27-01-2025
The above-mentioned writ petitions involve the same
fact and question of law; therefore, the aforesaid writ petitions are
taken up together for hearing and being disposed of by a common
judgment.
Cr. W.J.C. No. 433 of 2024
2. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition
praying for the issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari
quashing the order dated 24th June 2023 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Sherghati, Gaya, in Sessions Trial No.
500/23/1245/2023
arising out of Sherghati Barachatti P.S. Case
No. 854/22 with a further direction commanding the respondent
authorities to release a Bolero vehicle bearing registration no.
BR02Y6584 owned by the petitioner, which was seized by the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
Investigating Officer of this case in connection with the above-
mentioned P.S. Case under Section 395 of the IPC. One Jugesh
Kumar Mahto, driver of a bearing registration no. JH02AM 2760,
submitted a written complaint before the SHO Barachatti P.S. on
22nd August 2022, stating, inter alia, that he was driving the car
towards Uttar Pradesh after loading coal at Topa in the State of
Jharkhand on 21st September 2022 at about 11:00 PM; the driver of
the truck reached Chinnari Bridge at Barachatti. At that time one
white colour overtook and came in front of the truck of the driver
and forced the driver to stop the truck. Then some miscreants
traveling in the said Bolero took away the key of the truck. It is
also alleged that the accused persons fled away with the truck
towards Barachatti. It is submitted by the petitioner that the Bolero
car bearing registration no. BR02Y6584 was seized in connection
with Barachatti P.S. No. 854/22 dated 22.09.2022 under Section
395 of the IPC. The petitioner submitted an application before the
trial court for release of his vehicle, but the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Sherghati, Gaya, refused to release the said car.
Hence, the instant writ petition.
3. The instant writ petition has been filed by one
Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Kumar Singh with a prayer to set aside
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
an order dated 22nd September 2023 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui, in Sessions Trial No. 326 of
2023, arising out of Laxmipur P.S. Case No. 185 of 2022, whereby
and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui,
refused the prayer of the petitioner to release a Splendor Plus
motorcycle No. having registration no. BR-46L7036 with further
direction to the concerned authorities to release the said vehicle
during the pendency of the above-mentioned case.
4. Laxmipur P.S. Case No. 185 of 2022 was registered
under Sections 419/420/467/120(B) of the IPC and Sections
66(C)/66(D), 66(F) of the Information Technology Act, and
Sections 13, 16, and 17 of the U.A.P. Act.
5. The prosecution's case as set forth in the FIR dated
17th June 2022 is that the informant received confidential
intelligence regarding the involvement of certain individuals in
cybercrime in K.B.C. lottery scams and other fraudulent scams
wherein they allegedly amassed a substantial sum by cheating the
general public. Acting on the source of information, the police
proceeded to Bankat Main Road and intercepted three persons
riding on a Hero Honda Splendor Plus motorcycle bearing
registration No. BR-46-L7036. The said persons disclosed their
names as Amarjeet Kumar, Sharwan Kumar, and Ramesh Kumar.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
On search, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) in
cash with a mobile phone set having bank account details saved in
WhatsApp of the said phone linked to a Pakistan-based bank and
Cheque Book details. During interrogation, Amarjeet Kumar
confessed to being an active participant in a cyber fraud syndicate
engaged in duping innocent individuals. He further disclosed that
his co-accused, Sharwan Kumar and Ramesh Kumar, were also
associates in the said illegal activity. Police seized the motorcycle
from the possession of Ramesh Kumar, being a vehicle used in
committing the crime. The petitioner filed an application before
the learned trial court seeking release of the vehicle, which was
rejected vide an order dated 22nd September 2023 passed in
Sessions Trial No. 326/2023.
6. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has
approached this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the impugned order and
a direction for the release of the seized vehicle in his favour.
7. One Dharmendra Kumar, proprietor of M/s Ashutosh
Traders, has filed the instant writ petition seeking release of a 16-
wheeler truck bearing registration no. BR-03GB-7422, which was
seized by the Mining Development Officer, Saran, Chapra. The
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
vehicle was intercepted and seized on 7th October 2024 around
03:00 AM on the allegation of illegal mining and transportation of
minerals.
8. At the time of seizure, the driver of the truck produced
a valid challan issued by Maa Mahamaya Stone Crusher, bearing
Serial No. 29569 and Pass No. 2956887, issued from Balrampur
district in the State of Chhattisgarh. The vehicle was found to be
carrying 49,640 kg of stone chips. A mining officer issued letters
to verify the authenticity of the challan and sought information
regarding the GPS location of the vehicle from 04.10.2024 to
07.10.2024.
9. The Assistant Mining Officer, Balrampur,
Chhattisgarh, confirmed on 10.10.2024 that the challan was legal
and the consignment had reached its destination legally. A
discrepancy was noted in the unladen weight of the truck, with
Chhattisgarh records showing 14,440 kg, while the Motor Vehicle
Inspector (MVI), Saran, reported it as 9,695 kg. Since GPS
location data for the truck was unavailable, the Mining
Development officer determined that there was a violation of Rule
56(2) of the Bihar Minerals (Concession, Prevention of Illegal
Mining, Transport, and Storage) Rules, 2019, as amended in 2021.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
10. As a consequence, a fine of Rs. 306,100 was
imposed on the petitioner, and the said truck was seized.
11. By filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has
prayed for a direction upon the respondents to release the truck on
the ground that he was transporting minerals on the said truck
legally, as proven by the valid challan. The alleged discrepancy in
unladen weight was due to an administrative issue and has been
rectified by the District Transport Officer, Bhojpur, at Ara, and the
continued seizure of the vehicle is causing irreparable loss due to
natural wear and tear, depreciation, and loss of livelihood.
12. On 25th January 2024, at about 6:00 AM, the Sub-
Inspector of Police attached to Daniyawan P.S. got information on
his mobile phone that in Faridpur village, one Sikandar parked a
Swaraj tractor loaded with sand near Sikandar Cement and Sand
Shop. It was also informed that there might be narcotic drugs in
the form of ganja and firearms hidden in the tractor. After
receiving the said information, the police officer recorded the same
in the PS GD Book and went to village Faridpur and conducted a
search in the said tractor; however, on search, the informant did
not find any incriminating material. Subsequently, he received
information that one blue-colored tractor was parked near Faridpur
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
Dharmkanta by its driver and there is a firearm and narcotic drugs
loaded in the said tractor. The police officer again conducted a
search and recovered one country-made pistol with four live
cartridges of 0.315 bore and a packet of Ganja weighing about 96
grams. The police seized the said articles and made a suo moto
complaint against the driver of the said tractor, namely, Suraj
Paswan, on the basis of which Daniyawan PS Case No. 11 of 2024
dated 25th January was registered under Section 25(1B)a/26/35 of
the Arms Act and Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act. By filing
the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the issuance
of appropriate writ order or orders for the quashing of the order
dated 13th May 2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (NDPS,
Patna) in Serial No. 21 of 2024 (State Vs Suraj Paswan and Ors.)
whereby and whereunder the learned Trial Judge rejected the
petition filed by the petitioner on 31st January 2024 for the release
of the vehicle bearing registration no. BR-01GH-0562 with trailer
having register no. BR-01GH-1904.
13. I have heard the learned counsels for the petitioners
of the above-mentioned writ petitions separately and the learned
counsel for the State. I have also perused the materials on record.
Cr. W.J.C. No. 564 of 2024 has been filed with a prayer to set
aside an order dated 22nd September 2023 passed by the learned
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui, in Trial No. 326/23. Similarly,
Cr. W.J.C. No. 1354 of 2024 has been filed for setting aside an
order dated 13th May 2024 passed by the learned Special Judge
(NDPS) Patna rejecting the prayer for releasing a tractor. The
impugned orders challenged in the above-mentioned writ petitions
are revisable under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the CrPC
corresponding to Sections 438 and 442 of the Bhartiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanghita (BNSS, in short), 2023. Thus, the above-
mentioned writ petitions are not maintainable, challenging a
judicial order of the learned Sessions Judge.
14. In Cr. WJC No. 433 of 2024, a Bolero vehicle was
seized in connection with commission of offence under Section
395 of the IPC. It is alleged that the accused persons while
traveling by the seized Bolero vehicle intercepted a truck loaded
with coal and committed dacoity of coal. The petitioner is the
owner of the said vehicle. He is not a party to the alleged offence.
There is also no evidence to the effect that the petitioner entrusted
the accused persons to use the said vehicle for committing the
offence. Section 451 of the CrPC states as under:-
"451. Order for custody and disposal of
property pending trial in certain cases.--When any
property is produced before any Criminal Court
during any inquiry or trial, the Court may make such
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such
property pending the conclusion of the inquiry or trial,
and, if the property is subject to speedy and natural
decay, or if it is otherwise expedient so to do, the
Court may, after recording such evidence as it thinks
necessary, order it to be sold or otherwise disposed
of."
15. Next provision, relevant for the purpose of these
cases, is Section 456 of the CrPC which is quoted below:-
"456. Power to restore possession of
immovable property.--(1) When a person is convicted
of an offence attended by criminal force or show of
force or by criminal intimidation, and it appears to the
Court that, by such force or show of force or
intimidation, any person has been dispossessed of any
immovable property, the Court may, if it thinks fit,
order that possession of the same be restored to that
person after evicting by force, if necessary, any other
person who may be in possession of the property:
Provided that no such order shall be made
by the Court more than one month after the date of the
conviction.
(2) Where the Court trying the offence has
not made an order under sub-section (1), the Court of
appeal, confirmation or revision may, if it thinks fit,
make such order while disposing of the appeal,
reference or revision, as the case may be.
(3) Where an order has been made under
sub-section (1), the provisions of section 454 shall
apply in relation thereto as they apply in relation to an
order under section 453.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
(4) No order made under this section shall
prejudice any right or interest to or in such immovable
property which any person may be able to establish in
a civil suit."
16. It is needless to say a vehicle is seized by the police
or the investigating agency broadly under the following
circumstances:-
(i) When the accused commits any offence using the
vehicle as the means of offence. Secondly, when some contraband
articles/substances is recovered from the vehicle. Again, where the
owner of the vehicle is the person from whose possession the
vehicle is seized and it is proved that the owner is involved in
committing the offence or transported contraband drug/substance
which is recovered.
(ii) Where the contraband is recovered from the
possession of the agent of the owner, i.e., driver or cleaner hired
by the accused.
(iii) Where the vehicle has been stolen by the accused
and contraband is recovered from such stolen vehicle and,
(iv) Where the contraband is seized/recovered from a
third party occupant of the vehicle without any allegation by the
police that the vehicle was used for committing offence with the
knowledge and connivance of the owner.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
17. In the first two scenarios, the owner of the vehicle
and/or his agent would necessarily be arrayed as an accused. In the
third and fourth scenario, the owner of the vehicle and/or is agent
would not be arrayed as an accused.
18. Criminal law has not to be applied in a vacuum but
to the facts of each case. Consequently, it is only in the first two
scenarios that the vehicle may not be released in favour of the
owner till reverse burden of proof is discharged by the
accused/owner. However, in third and fourth scenarios, where no
allegation has been made in the charge-sheet against the owner and
/or his agent, the vehicle should normally be released on owner's
executing bond with certain conditions found to be relevant by the
Court.
19. In Sainaba Vs. State of Kerala and Another, Special
Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 13370/2024 charge-sheet was not filed
against the owner of the vehicle nor the authorized driver. Third-
party occupants were the accused. Under such circumstances, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sainaba Vs. State of Kerala and Anr. ,
2022 SCC OnLine Sc 1784 directed release of vehicle relying on
the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai
Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, reported in (2002) 10 SCC
283.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
20. In Cr.WJC 433 of 2024, the petitioner being the
owner of the bolero vehicle was not a party to the commission of
the offence, therefore, the said vehicle be released on his executing
Zima bond of Rs. 10,000,00/- (Rupees 10 lakhs only) with further
condition that he will not change the nature, character and color of
the vehicle or transfer the vehicle till the disposal of Barachatti
P.S. Case no. 854/22.
21. In respect of the prayer for release of a splendor plus
motorcycle having registration no. BR-46L7036 in Cr. WJC 564 of
2024, it is ascertained that the petitioner was involved in
committing the offence under Section 419/420/467/120B of the
IPC and Sections 66 (C) /66 (D), 66 (F) of the Information
Technology Act read with Sections 13,16,17 of the U.A.P. Act. It
was ascertained during investigation that the accused/owner of the
vehicle used the same for committing digital fraud and cyber-
crime and his phone number was linked vide WhatsApp to a
Pakistan based bank. Considering the material disclosed during
investigation this Court is not inclined to release the said vehicle.
22. Cr.W.J.C. No. 2388 of 2024 challenges an order of
seizure of a 16-wheeler truck bearing registration no. BR03GB-
7422 by the District Mining Officer, Saran, Chhapra. The reason
for the seizure of the vehicle was that the Mining Development
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
Officer suspected illegal transportation of stone chips after taking
the measurement and weight of the stone chips and unloaded
truck. The truck's unladen weight was recorded in Chhattisgarh,
and it was found that it weighs 14,440 kg. The said weight differed
from the weight recorded by the MVI, Saran, as he found that the
unladen weight of the truck was 9695 kg.
23. The petitioner has submitted all relevant documents,
including a valid challan issued by Maa Mahamaya Stone Crusher,
Balrampur, Chhattisgarh. The Assistant Mining Officer,
Balrampur, Chhattisgarh, officially verified the challan's
authenticity, confirming that the goods were transported legally
and reached their destination. It is also contended on behalf of the
petitioner that the alleged difference in unladen weight of the truck
(14440 kg in Chhattisgarh vs. 9695 kg as per MVI, Saran) is an
administrative inconsistency rather than an illegal act by the
petitioner. The District Transport Officer, Bhojpur at Ara, has
rectified the weight through an official communication dated 16th
October 2024.
24. In Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat
reported in 2002 (10) SCC 283, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
held that the vehicles should not be kept in the custody of
administrative authority for long period as their value depreciates.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.433 of 2024 dt.27-01-2025
Courts should direct the release of vehicles to the rightful owner
subject to necessary conditions.
25. Applying this principle, the continued seizure of the
truck is unjustified as it serves no legal or evidentiary purpose.
Considering such circumstances, the Mining Development Officer,
Saran, Chhapra, is directed to pass an order of interim release of
the truck in favour of the petitioner on his executing a Zimma
Bond of Rs. 500,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only), with the further
condition that he will not change the nature, character, colour and
specification of the seized truck till the disposal of the legal
proceeding instituted against him by the Mining Department and
shall produce the truck as and when called for by the
respondents/authority.
26. With the above order, the Cr. W.J.C. No. 2388 of
2024 is allowed on contest. However, there shall be no order as to
cost.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
Suraj Dubey/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 06.02.2025
Transmission Date 06.02.2025
