SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Raj) 488

VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Valaram – Appellant
Versus
State, Through PP – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sabir Khan for Mr. Pradeep Shah, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner has preferred this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 18.04.2019 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Salumber, District Udaipur in Criminal Revision No. 20/2019 upholding the order dated 03.04.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Salumber, District Udaipur in FIR No. 25/2019, Police Station Gingla, District Udaipur whereby learned trial court directed the petitioner to furnish a bank guarantee of Rs. 1,26,400/- for release of vehicle i.e. tractor along with trolley bearing registration No. RJ-27-RB-4373 on supurdginama.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in bunch of petitions, lead case being D.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 60/2018, titled as Laxman v. State of Rajasthan, a Division Bench of this Court on 06.04.2018, has held that if a vehicle has been seized under the Provisions of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short MMDR Act), for 72 hours competent Officer can retain the vehicle and thereafter, he is mandatorily required to report the matter to his superior officer as also to the Magistrate having jurisdiction.

3. The learned c











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top