[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Patna High Court
Brij Kishor Prasad vs The State Of Bihar Through Chief ... on 20 February, 2026
Author: Arun Kumar Jha
Bench: Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1419 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Saran
======================================================
Brij Kishor Prasad, Son of Sohaban Ray, resident of Village- Jalalpur, PS-
Doriganj, Dist- Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar, through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna, Bihar
Bihar
2. The Additional Chief Secretary Cum Mines Commissioner, Patna, Bihar
Bihar
3. The Mines Development Officer, West Champaran , Motihari, Bihar Bihar
4. The District Magistrate Cum Collector, Saran, Bihar Bihar
5. The Mines Inspector, Motihari, Saran, Bihar Bihar
6. Station House Officer, PS- Sangrampur, Saran, Bihar Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Chhaya Kirti, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, SC-12
For the Dept. of Mines : Mr. Utsav Anand, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
CAV JUDGMENT
Date : 20-02-2026
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition
seeking following reliefs :
"(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s),
order (s) or direction (s) in the nature of
mandamus or any other writ(s) order(s
direction(s) to the respondent authorities to
release the vehicle i.e. 12- wheeler Truck
bearing registration no. BR01GL9906 in
favour of the petitioner as seized by
respondent no.5-Mines Inspector, Motihari
vide memo of seizure dated 08.11.2023 and
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
further taken into the custody of SHO, P.S.-
Sangrampur i.e. respondent no.6 under
actions prescribed in Bihar Minerals
(Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining,
Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2021.
(ii) For issuance of appropriate writ(s),
order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of
mandamus or any other writ(s) order(s)
direction(s) to the respondent authorities to
cancel the letter dated 27.11.2023 whereby
which the respondent no. 3 has imposed
penalty in order to get the vehicle released.
(iii) For issuance of appropriate writ(s),
order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of
mandamus or any other writ(s) order(s)
direction(s) to the respondent authorities to
pay the damages or compensation for the
loss so suffered by the petitioner due to the
illegal actions of the respondents as it has
affected the business of the petitioner as well
as deteriorated the value of the vehicle.
(iv) For issuance of any other writ(s)
order(s) or direction(s) as the petitioner is
entitled to.
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present
writ petition are that the petitioner is stated to be the owner of a
12 wheeler Truck bearing registration no. BR-01GL-9906 with
Chassis No. MAT466388G3G55989 and Engine No.
61G68352458. The petitioner is engaged in transportation
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
business. The petitioner claims that he possessed a valid challan
dated 05.11.2023 issued by the Government of Bihar, explicitly
authorizing the transportation of yellow sand weighing 22.70
metric tonnes equivalent to 567.50 CFT in volume.
3. Further case of the petitioner is that during a routine
inspection, the truck of the petitioner was inspected by the
Mines Inspector, Motihari and further weighed as 34.695 MT in
gross which was found within the permissible limit for
transportation. However, the loaded vehicle was seized by the
Mines Inspector and later sent to the custody of SHO,
Sangrampur without any valid reason. The said vehicle has the
valid permit laden limit of 35,000 Kg (35MT) in total and the
vehicle with load was found well within the permissible weight
limit. Even then, the Mines Development Officer, vide letter
dated 27.11.2023, under Rule 56(4) of Bihar Minerals
(Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and
Storage) Amended Rules, 2021 (hereinafter to be referred as
'Rules, 2021'), directed the petitioner to pay penalty of Rs.
2,65,596/- within thirty days.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the concerned respondent has arbitrarily seized the vehicle of
the petitioner, who is the bonafide owner of the vehicle in
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
question and is engaged in the business of transportation. For
carrying sand on the said vehicle, the petitioner has got a valid
challan and the driver was carrying the same.
5. The learned counsel further submitted that at the
time of issuance of challan, the empty truck (unladen) was
weighed as 11.49 MT and after loading of yellow sand, it was
weighed as 34.19 MT in total, which was within the permissible
limit of 35MT as mentioned in the goods permit issued by the
Transport Department, Bihar.
6. The learned counsel further submitted that in view of
Rule 56 of the Rules, 2021, the officers are empowered to seize
the vehicle if it is found without a valid challan or permit, in
accordance with law. However, in the instant case, the gross
vehicle weight was found to be well withing the permissible
limit and yet the respondent authorities, in hope of illegal
gratification, wrongly seized the vehicle and taken it into
custody.
7. The learned counsel further submitted that the
respondent authorities in excess of their powers have
overlooked the challan, determined the weight of the loaded
sand on their own and wrongly seized the vehicle harassing the
petitioner mentally and financially.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
8. The learned counsel further submitted that the gross
vehicle weight was duly found within the permissible laden
limit as given in the certificate of registration of the vehicle, the
letter dated 27.11.2023 directing the petitioner to pay penalty of
Rs. 2,65,596/- within thirty days is not sustainable in the eyes of
law. In this regard, the learned counsel relied upon a judgment
dated 26.04.2024 of this Court passed in CWJC No. 11469 of
2023.
9. The learned counsel further submitted that the
mineral such as sand which is under transportation in the instant
case has to be measured in volume as relevant provisions for
different miners are classified in their respective measuring
units. In other words, it can be said that the volume of sand may
differ in weight and, therefore, simple calculation of deducting
the unladen weight of truck from the gross weight of the truck
could not determine the actual quantity of sand being
transported. Therefore, the respondent no. 5 was wrong in
considering the weight of the sand while it ought to have been
measured in volume and the same could be verified with the
quantity mentioned in the challan.
10. The learned counsel further submitted that in case
of any dual method of determination of weight of the vehicle or
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
permissible limit of challan, this Court may direct the
respondent authorities to reweigh the loaded sand in volume so
as to verify the challan dated 05.11.2023 wherein volume of
yellow sand and its equivalent weight is mentioned.
11. Thus, learned counsel submitted that seizure of
vehicle has caused financial loss to the petitioner and also led
deterioration in value of the vehicle and it would further hamper
the business of the petitioner leading to deprivation of the right
of the petitioner conferred under Articles 14 and 21 of the
Constitution of India.
12. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of Department of Mines vehemently contended that the
vehicle of the petitioner has been rightly seized. The learned
counsel raised a preliminary objection with regard to
maintainability of the writ petition in view of the fact that the
impugned letter dated 27.11.2023 issued by the respondent no.
3, which has sought to be set aside in the present writ petition, is
an appealable order to be challenged before the Collector under
Rule 67(1) of the Bihar Minerals (Concession, Prevention of
Illegal Mining, Transportation, Storage) Rules, 2019
(hereinafter to be referred as 'the Rules, 2019').
13. The learned counsel further submitted that after
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
seizure of the vehicle, the Mining Inspector, Motihari prepared a
seizure list of the said truck and subsequently, the challan of the
truck for transportation of sand was produced by the owner of
the said truck/petitioner and from perusal of the said challan, it
transpired that the total weight of the truck including sand was
22.70 MT, whereas as per the registration certificate of the said
truck, it transpired that the total capacity of the truck to carry
any mineral was 35,000 Kg and total weight of the empty truck
was 10,000 Kg. Subsequently, the truck loaded with sand was
weighed in the presence of the petitioner, whereupon the total
weight of the truck loaded with sand came as 34,695 Kg.
14. The learned counsel further submitted that after
deducting the total estimated weight of the empty truck i.e.
10,000 kg from the total weight of the truck loaded with sand
i.e. (34,695-10,000) comes as 24,695 Kg. Learned counsel
further submitted that according to mineral transit pass/e-challan
Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Bihar, 1 MT
of sand is equivalent to 25 CFT sand in volumetric quantity and,
in such circumstance, the total 24.695 MT of sand being carried
on the vehicle in question is equivalent to 617.25 CFT sand.
15. The learned counsel further submitted that from
perusal of the challan dated 05.11.2023 issued by the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
Government of Bihar, it would be apparent that the total
permissible quantity of sand allowed to be transported was
567.50 CFT and therefore the vehicle in question was
overloaded with (617.25-567.50 CFT) i.e. 49.75 CFT sand.
16. The learned counsel further submitted that the
illegal transportation of 49.75 CFT excess sand has caused loss
to the public exchequer and, in such circumstance, following the
provisions stipulated in proviso to Rule 56(2) of the Rules,
2019, the Mineral Development Officer, East Champaran,
Motihari, issued a memo no. 959 dated 27.11.2023 to the
petitioner imposing a cost of penalty as well as the amount of
compounding fee, which comes to the tune of Rs. 2,65,596/- and
as such the imposition of penalty is in consonance and within
the four corners of the proviso to Rule 56(2) of the Rules, 2019.
17. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submission of the parties and perused the records.
18. Having regard to the rival submission as well as
claim and counter claim regarding overloading, it appears the
vehicle of the petitioner was re-weighed on weighbridge and it
was found to be carrying sand in excess of the permissible
weight to the tune of 49.75 CFT which roughly comes around 2
MT. So, action of the respondent no.5 appears to be in tune with
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
the statutory provision especially Section 56(1) (2) and Section
60(2) of the 'Rules 2021'. Therefore, no orders could be passed
for release of the vehicle straightway as prayed for by the
petitioner.
19. However, considering the fact that the petitioner
claims that when the vehicle was loaded and weighed at the
weighbridge, its laden weight came to be 34.19 MT (34190 kg.)
and subsequently when it was weighed at the instance of
respondent authorities, its weight came to be 34695 kg, the
difference appears to be only 505 kg. On the other hand, the
calculation of the Mining Department shows it to be overloaded
with 2 MT though the weight of the laden truck was found to be
34695 kg.
20. Therefore, I think it proper to allow the alternative
prayer of the petitioner for reweighing the vehicle both by
voumetric measurement as well as on weighbridge and the
concerned respondent authorities are directed to get the vehicle
of the petitioner reweighed by voumetric measurement as well
as on weighbridge by fixing a date in presence of the petitioner
or his representative within thirty days from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order.
21. At the same time, it is made clear that if the weight
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
is found to be within permissible limit of challan, the vehicle of
the petitioner would be released forthwith. In case it is found to
be overloaded, the vehicle will be released after payment of
penalty amount of Rs.2,65,596/- in six equal monthly
installments considering the mandate of law and observation
made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court the case of Sunderbhai
Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283
regarding release of seized vehicles.
22. Accordingly, the present writ petition is partly
allowed.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 12.12.2025
Uploading Date 20.02.2026
Transmission Date 20.02.2026
