The central legal point established in the judgment is the release of vehicles under mining and forest laws, emphasizing the need for compensation/compounding fee and bank guarantee until the conclusion of proceedings.

JUDGMENT

1. In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court, for the safety of all concerned.

2. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Criminal Misc. Petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 03.08.2021 & 15.09.2021 passed by learned Court below, may kindly be quashed and set aside and grant the custody of the vehicle No.(RJ22GA4346) to the petitioner on Superdginama."

3. While taking into consideration the contextual facts of this case and upon a perusal of the record, this Court finds that the present case is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Kishore Singh v. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3595/2021, decided alongwith other connected petitions, on 15.09.2021), relevant portion of which reads as under:

"21. After hearing learned counsel for the parties as well as perusing the record of the case, alongwith the precedents laws cited by learned counsel the parties, this Court finds that the core law has already been substantially explained in the judgment of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. (supra), as the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has while delivering the said judgment, kept into consideration the practical difficulties of holding the vehicles, and has also considered that the same ought to be released, while imposing or without imposing appropriate compensation/compounding fee, to be paid by the registered owner of the respective vehicle.

22. In the precedent law of Adhikshak Rashtriya Chambal Abhyaran v. Narottam Singh (supra), as cited by learned Additional Government Counsel for the State, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically dealt with the issues of the law pertaining to release of vehicles, and has clearly observed that once the confiscation proceedings have been initiated, any orders for possession, delivery, disposal or distribution of the property ought not to be passed. Thus, the confiscation proceedings have been taken at a different pedestal, as per the precedent law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said judgment, which is now law of the land.

23. It is needless to say that the second important reliance upon the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court at Jaipur Bench Laxman v. State of Rajasthan (supra), in which the Hon'ble Division Bench has categorically laid down that the jurisdiction of the magistrate to release the vehicles under Sections 451 & 457 Cr.P.C. is alive with or without imposition of compensation/compounding fee.

24. The judgment rendered by this Hon'ble Court at Jaipur Bench in Irfan v. State of Rajasthan has reiterated most of the laws pertaining to release of vehicles, at length.

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. v. State of Gujarat (supra) and Adhikshak Rashtriya Chambal Abhyaran v. 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.