Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
M/S. Bhanwar Construction Company vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:3438) on 15 January, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:3438]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 7701/2024
M/s. Bhanwar Construction Company, Through Proprrietor
Bhanwar Lal S/o Ramchandra R/o 01, Khedo Ki Dhani, Mandla
Kallan, Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Laxman Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shree Ram Choudhary, AGA
Mr. Devendra Prajapat
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
15/01/2025
1. A Dumper bearing No.RJ-43-GA-7884 and JCB bearing
No.RJ-43-EA-0631, 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.
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 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
[2025:RJ-JD:3438] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7701/2024]
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 fee, shall be deposited by the registered
owners before the trial court before release of the
vehicles in question.
[2025:RJ-JD:3438] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7701/2024]
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.
(FARJAND ALI),J
77-divya/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
