JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Sidhartha Roy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Amitesh Kumar Geasan and Mrs. Priya Shrestha, the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State in respective cases.

2. These petitions have been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3. Heard Mr. Siddharth Roy, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in W.P.(Cr.) No.168 of 2021 and he has also appeared on behalf of the sole Opposite Party in Cr.M.P.No.1824/2021. Mr. Amitesh Kumar Geasan, the learned counsel has argued in W.P.(Cr.) No.168/2021 on behalf of the State. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, the learned counsel has argued in Cr.M.P.No.1824/2021 in both the petitions on common question of fact, law and judgment are the subject matter and that is why both these petitions have been heard together with the consent of the parties.

W.P.(Cr) No.168 of 2021

4. This petition has been filed for direction upon the respondent no.2 to forthwith release the vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration no.WB 37C 9865. Further prayer is made for direction upon the respondent no.2 to comply the order dated 25.03.2021 passed by learned ACJM, Ranchi in Complaint Case No.5507/2020 by which the vehicle of the petitioner was ordered to be released after indemnity bond of Rs.15 lakhs, with two sureties of like amount each, was furnished on behalf of the petitioner, which has already been furnished on behalf of the petitioner. Now pending in the court of learned ACJM, Ranchi.

5. Mr. Siddharth Roy, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Deputy Transport Commissioner cum Secretary, South Chhotanagpur Regional Transport Authority, Ranchi has passed the order dated 01.10.2020 assessing the tax liability upon the petitioner to the tune of Rs.11,28,470/-. He further submits that it has been ordered that if that amount is not paid, prosecution will be launched against the petitioner under sections 21(a) and 22(3) of Jharkhand Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 2001. Pursuant thereto, the prosecution against the petitioner was initiated by Annexure-A to the counter affidavit. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition for release of the vehicle before the Court of ACJM, Ranchi and the learned court has passed the order dated 17.12.2020 which was numbered as Misc. Criminal Application No.5859/2020 corresponding to Complaint Case No.5507/2020 which was heard on 17.12.2020 and posted for that day whereby learned court directed to release the vehicle of the petitioner on the condition that the entire taxation amount shall be deposited by the petitioner in four equal EMI and furnishing of two sureties of Rs.15 lakhs each. It was further directed that after getting it released the petitioner shall remove all such invalid alteration. Aggrieved with this order, the petitioner has preferred Criminal Revision No.14/2021 before the learned AJC-XVI, Ranchi which was decided on 19.03.2021 and the learned AJC has modified the order so far as paying of the taxation is concerned and to that extent, as indicated in the paragraph no.6 of the judgment in revisional court and with that modification the revisional application was allowed and it was communicated to the court of ACJM, Ranchi. After that order, the learned ACJM, Ranchi by order dated 25.03.2021 directed to Secretary, South Chhotanagpur Regional Transport Authority, Ranchi to release the vehicle of the petitioner.

6. Mr. Roy, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that inspite of this development, the vehicle in question of the petitioner has not been released by the respondent no.2 and that is why the petitioner has been compelled to file writ. He submits that the commercial vehicle of the petitioner has been seized on 29.09.2020 and almost an year is going t