Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Yashpal Choudhary vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:2197) on 9 January, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:2197]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 221/2025
Yashpal Choudhary S/o Mohanram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
180, Mahadev Nager, Pal Road, District Jodhpur (Raj)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Khilery
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Chandawat, Dy.GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
09/01/2025
1. A dumper vehicle bearing No. RJ-19-GG-2800, stated to
be source of livelihood of the petitioner/owner, was allegedly found
stealthily quarried/mined sand. Allegation also is that it was
un-authorizedly quarried/mined without any valid permission of
sanction from the competent authority. The said offending vehicle
is sought to be released on Superdari through instant petition. It
was impounded pursuant to the FIR No.245/2024 registered at
Police Station Chopasani Housing Board, District Jodhpur for the
offences under Section 125, 303(2) of BNS and Sections 4 and 21
of MMDR Act.
2. Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the
controversy involved in the present case is squarely covered by
the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court is
similar circumstance in the case of Kishore Singh Vs. State of
[2025:RJ-JD:2197] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-221/2025]
Rajasthan: (2021) 0 Supreme (Raj.) 139. The Coordinate
Bench opined thus:-
"25. This Court, on a careful examination of the precedent
laws in an intricate manner, finds that the precedent laws of
Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
(supra) and Adhikshak Rashtriya Chambal Abhyaran Vs.
Narottam Singh (supra), as laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, shall govern the field, and thus, the vehicles
seized under the mining law and the forest law, shall be
released, upon charging the compensation/compounding fee
or without charging the compensation/compounding fee, only
and only, if the confiscation proceedings in regard thereto
have not been initiated by the State authorities. It is to be
noted that both mining and the forest laws have the provisions
for confiscation proceedings.
26. It is also observed that until the confiscation
proceedings are initiated, the Magistrate concerned shall have
the power to release the vehicle(s) with or without condition
of deposition of compensation/compounding fee, but the
Magistrate concerned shall be required to impose a condition
of furnishing of a bank guarantee, so as to secure the
compensation/compounding fee, if required to be levied in
future, after completion of the proceedings.
27. It is made clear that once the confiscation proceedings
are initiated, the possession, delivery, disposal or distribution
of the property cannot be made, in view of the law laid down
in Adhikshak Rashtriya Chambal Abhyaran Vs. Narottam
Singh (supra).
28. Thus, while parting with the present controversy, it is
directed that all the police stations shall release the vehicles in
question, may it be tractor, trolley, truck, dumper to the
registered owners of the said vehicles, after confirming from
the respective Department that there is no confiscation
proceeding, under the mining or forest laws, going on in
regard to the vehicles in question.
29. To ensure that after undergoing the proceedings, the
concerned parties i.e. registered owners of the vehicles in
question shall be paying the requisite
compensation/compounding fee, it is directed that the active
bank guarantee, equivalent to the compensation/compounding
[2025:RJ-JD:2197] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-221/2025]
fee, shall be deposited by the registered owners before the
trial court before release of the vehicles in question.
30. It is also directed that after such bank guarantee
equivalent to the compensation/compounding fee is deposited
before the trial court concerned, to which the concerned police
station is attached, the trial court concerned shall be required
to keep such bank guarantees intact, until the final conclusion
of the proceedings; and until the final conclusion of such
proceedings is done by the competent courts, the bank
guarantee shall remain subject to it and the orders passed at
the end of the proceedings by the concerned trial court shall
govern disposal of the bank guarantee.
31. It is further made clear that the petitioners shall be
required to furnish photographs of their respective vehicles,
showing their numbers, colours etc. Furthermore, at the time
of release of the vehicles in question, the petitioners shall give
an undertaking before the concerned learned trial court
alongwith bank guarantee, as directed, that they shall not use
such vehicles for any illegal and unlawful purpose, and in case
any second offence, by means of the vehicles, is made out,
then the same shall not be released, on any condition, until
the confiscation proceedings come to an end."
(emphasis supplied)
3. Accordingly, the present misc. petition is allowed in terms
of the order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the
case of Kishore Singh (supra).
4. The order has been passed based on the submissions
made in the petitions, the respondents would be free to examine
the veracity of the submissions made in the petitions and only in
case the averments made therein are found to be correct, the
petitioner would be entitled to the relief sought.
5. Stay application also stands disposed of, accordingly.
(FARJAND ALI),J
Abhishek Kumar
S.No.344
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
