Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Rawal Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:5817)
2026 Latest Caselaw 1489 Raj

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 1489 Raj
Judgement Date : 2 February, 2026

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Rawal Singh vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:5817) on 2 February, 2026

[2026:RJ-JD:5817]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
               S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 10654/2025

Ibrahim     Khan    S/o   Rahmat        Khan,       Aged         About   41   Years,
Residentof J.a.d. Colony, Ward No. 13, Jalore, Presently Residing
At Wadia Godiji, Jalore, Tehsil And District Jalore Raj..
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.       State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
2.       Mining Engineer, Department Of Mines And Geology,
         Jalore.
3.       Sho, Police Station Kotwali, Jalore.
4.       District Transport And Road Safety Officer, Transport
         Department, District Jalore.
                                                                  ----Respondents
                              Connected With
                S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 9414/2025
Rawal Singh S/o Shri Sujan Singh, Aged About 38 Years,
Resident Of Shetrava, Tehsil Shetrava, District Jodhpur.
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
                                                                   ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)         :     Mr. Ikbal Khan
                                Mr. Aziz Khan
For Respondent(s)         :     Mr. Anurag Jiyani and Mr. Devendra
                                Prajapat for Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi,
                                AAG



      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order

02/02/2026

The matter comes upon consideration of an application (I.A.

No.01/2026) seeking early listing of the case.

(Uploaded on 02/02/2026 at 06:38:55 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:5817] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-10654/2025]

For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is

allowed.

Learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned

Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of Mining

Department jointly submit that the controversy involved in these

matters is no more res integra in view of judgment passed by

Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Chaina Ram Vs. State of

Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.597/2024, decided on

19.05.2025), and the issue raised in these criminal misc. petitions

being squarely covered by the ratio laid down in the said

judgment, the petitions can be be disposed of in terms of the

judgment aforesaid. The relevant para of the judgment reads as

follows :-

"6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material available on record.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having perused the judgments of the coordinate Benches of this Court particularly in the cases of Kishore Singh (supra), Narayan Gadri (supra) and M/s Mahadev Construction (supra), this Court finds that the controversy involved in the present batch of criminal misc. petitions has already been set to rest and is no longer res integra. Therefore, the petitions in hand are to be decided in accordance with the parameters laid down in these judgments.

8. Consequently, it is held that under the mining laws, the state authorities have the powers for initiating confiscation proceedings in relation to the vehicles seized for violation of the mining laws. It is once, the confiscation proceedings are initiated, the vehicle cannot be released on supurdaginama as prayed by few of the petitioners. However, the said vehicles can only be released on payment of penalty and compounding fees. Whereas, the vehicles qua which no confiscation proceedings have yet been

(Uploaded on 02/02/2026 at 06:38:55 PM)

[2026:RJ-JD:5817] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-10654/2025]

commenced, the competent criminal Court can handover interim custody of the vehicles to its true owner as a criminal Court is not supposed to keep a vehicle detained until the confiscation proceedings are commenced and concluded by the mining department.

9. It is however, made clear that in the cases where criminal Court had handed over interim custody of the vehicles to its true owners on supurdaginama, the mining department shall be free to pass confiscation orders and take back the vehicles in accordance with law.

10. The present batch of criminal misc. petitions is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent Court for filing fresh applications for release of their vehicle. The competent Court shall decided the fresh applications, if filed, in accordance with the observations made by this Court in para 8 of the judgment.

11. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.

12. A copy of this order be placed in each file."

In view of the submission aforesaid, we are inclined to

dispose of these criminal miscellaneous petitions in terms of the

judgment passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Chaina

Ram (supra).

Stay application as well as all pending applications, if any,

stands disposed of accordingly.

(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J 18-19-deep/-

(Uploaded on 02/02/2026 at 06:38:55 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter