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

2024 Supreme(Raj) 1518

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI, J.
Durga Ram S/o Shri Budha Ram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 8189/2024
Decided on : 21-11-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Harish Gurjar, Mr. Tanay Jain, Mr. Harshwardhan Rajpurohit
For the Respondent: Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, Dy.GA, Mr. Ravindra Singh, Asstt. GA

IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that vehicles seized for illegal mining can be released upon verification of confiscation proceedings and payment of penalties, ensuring compliance with mining laws.

Headnote:

(A) Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 - Sections 4 and 21 - Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 - Rule 54(3) - Vehicle impounded for illegal mining - Release of vehicle on Superdari subject to payment of penalty - Court clarifies conditions for release and the necessity of verifying confiscation proceedings before release. (Paras 7-12)

(B) Jurisdiction of Magistrate - The court reiterates that the Magistrate has the authority to release vehicles seized under mining laws, with or without conditions, depending on the status of confiscation proceedings. (Paras 9-10)

Judgement Key Points
  • A JCB vehicle (RJ-19-EA-5065) was seized for allegedly quarrying river sand without valid permission, registered under FIR No.199/2024 for offences under BNS Section 303(2) read with MMDR Sections 4 and 21. (!)
  • The vehicle has been lying unused at the police station since 24.07.2024, deteriorating over time. (!)
  • The Magistrate allowed the petitioner's superdari application vide order dated 12.09.2024, but conditioned it on depositing Rs.3,33,500/- as penalty including compounded fee levied by the Mining Officer. (!)
  • The criminal revision against the Magistrate's order was dismissed by the Sessions Judge on 04.10.2024. (!)
  • Police intercepted the vehicle on 24.07.2024 while it was filling river sand into a tractor trolley from an unauthorized mining site. (!) (!)
  • Penalty proceedings initiated under RMMCR Rule 54(3), calculating Rs.3,33,500/- based on quantity of sand, royalty per tonne, and compounding fee. (!)
  • Superdari application under BNSS Section 503 filed before Magistrate, allowed subject to penalty deposit. (!)
  • Vehicles seized under mining laws can be released by Magistrate with or without conditions, depending on confiscation proceedings status. (!)
  • Uncertainty in the record regarding initiation of confiscation proceedings under RMMCR Rule 54(6). (!)
  • Directions issued to verify if confiscation proceedings initiated; if yes, release only on payment of penalty and compounding fee. (!) (!)
  • If no confiscation proceedings initiated and only appeal against penalty pending, petitioner at liberty to seek fresh superdari on furnishing bank guarantee equivalent to vehicle's current value, plus other conditions. (!)

ORDER :

1. A JCB (RJ-19-EA-5065), stated to be source of livelihood of the petitioner/owner, was allegedly found stealthily quarried/mined river sand ¼ctjh½. 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 an FIR No.199/2024 registered at Police Station Pratap Nagar (Jodhpur City West), District Jodhpur City West for the offences under Sections 303(2) of BNS read with Sections 4 and 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the 'MMDA').

2. Ever-since 24.07.2024, the vehicle in question is lying parked, turning into junk/beyond repair by each passing day, unattended and out of usage, at Police Station Pratap Nagar, District Jodhpur City West.

3. An application for release of vehicle on Superdari filed by the petitioner before the learned Magistrate was though allowed vide impugned order dated 12.09.2024, but an onerous condition of depositing the entire amount of penalty to the tune of Rs.3,33,500/-, which includes compounded fee, as levied by Mining Officer, was directed to be deposited as a precondition of its release.

4. A criminal revision assailing the order of the learned trial Court/Magistrate before the learned Sessions Judge was also dismissed vide an order dated 04.10.2024 affirming the view taken by the learned Magistrate.

5. Briefly speaking, the relevant facts of the case are that on 24.07.2024, the police intercepted the offending vehicle, which was found filling river sand ¼ctjh½ in a tractor trolley allegedly mined without any authorization from the mining site.

5.1. The said site is stated to be not an authorized piece of land for mining, and thus, comes under the category of illegal mining area. The petitioner was booked for illegal mining activity under Section 4/21 of MMDR read with Section 303(2) of BNS. On the complaint of the police officer, the aforesaid FIR was thus registered.

5.2. Simultaneously, penalty proceedings were also initiated by the mining department under Rule 54(3) of Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the RMMCR’). After due calculations, qua the quantity of the river sand ¼ctjh½ and the applicable royalty per tonne and the compounding fee, a total of Rs.3,33,500/- was directed to be paid by the petitioner.

5.3. Meanwhile, when an application for Superdari was filed by the petitioner under Sections 503 of BNSS before the learned Magistrate, it was allowed subject to the precondition of deposit of the penalty as already stated hereinabove. Aggrieved by the onerous condition, the instant petition before this Court.

6. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Dy.GA appearing for the respondent-State.

7. At the very outset, before proceeding further, it would be worthwhile to refer to a judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in somewhat similar circumstances in the case title 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 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

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 Back to top