Mohammed Harun vs State (2023:Rj-Jd:39569)
2023 Latest Caselaw 9910 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:39569]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Appli No. 171/2020

Mohammed Harun S/o Shri Mohammed Sadiq, Aged About 46 Years, By Caste Muslim, Presently resident of Nagaur, Tehsil And District Nagaur (Raj.).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State, Through P.P.

2. The Mining Engineer, Mines And Geology Department, Gotan, District Nagaur.

3. The Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology, Nagaur. (Applicant).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhawani Singh Mertia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Digvijay Singh Jasol

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Order

20/11/2023

An application has been filed by the Department of Mines

and Geology, Nagaur for modification of the order dated

29.06.2020.

Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that

the vehicle of the petitioner was released by this Court relying

upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of

Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in

(2002) 10 SCC 283. Learned counsel for the applicant further

submits that the vehicle was carrying Bajri beyond the permissible

limit as mentioned in the Ravanna by the Mining Department. He

submits that as per the MMCR Rules, 2017, the petitioner was

liable to pay a penalty of Rs.1,08,000/-. He, therefore, prays that

[2023:RJ-JD:39569] (2 of 2) [CRLMA-171/2020]

the petitioner may be directed to deposit the amount of penalty

and thereafter the custody of the vehicle in question may be

handed over to him.

I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have

gone through the order dated 29.06.2020.

The vehicle in which the Bajri was being carried by the

petitioner has been released by this Court vide order dated

29.06.2020 on Supurdginama in light of the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai

(supra). While passing the order dated 29.069.2020, in paragraph

6, the condition of furnishing a bank guarantee of Rs.1,00,000/-

has been mentioned for releasing the vehicle. Since the matter

with respect to carrying of Bajri illegally is still pending

consideration before the trial court and the interest of the Mining

Department has already been reasonably safeguarded while

passing the order dated 29.06.2020, it will not be in the interest

of justice and in the fitness of things if the present application is

allowed directing the petitioner to deposit the penalty amount of

Rs.1,08,000/-.

In view of the above discussion, the application for

modification of the order dated 29.06.2020 does not merit

acceptance. The application is, therefore, dismissed.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J 27-/Vivek/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)