IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized that the vehicle could only be forfeited after the trial concluded and a conviction was held, and directed interim custody of the vehicle to be released in favor of the petitioner with specific terms and conditions.

JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. Vide order dated 15.12.2022, the respondent-State was directed to file counter affidavit and in spite of that, counter affidavit has not been filed.

3. Further, it appears that this case is covered in view of the judgment passed by this Court in Cr..M.P. No.1332 of 2020, dated 11.05.2022. In that view of the matter, with consent of the parties, this petition is being heard on merit.

4. This petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 07.10.2021 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Misc. Criminal Application No.2936 of 2020 (arising out of Tamar P.S. Case No.01 of 2020) by which the petition filed by the petitioner for release of his truck bearing Registration No.JH-02-AC-4880 has been rejected. The prayer is also made for quashing the order dated 21.03.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Criminal Revision No.25 of 2022. The prayer is also made for quashing the order dated 04.01.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi in Confiscation Case No.29 of 2020-21. The prayer is also made for direction upon the respondents to release the said truck.

5. Tamar P.S. Case No.01 of 2020 has been registered on the basis of the written application submitted by the then District Mining Officer, Ranchi, wherein, it has been alleged that in course of inspection, 5 vehicles loaded with coal, 7 vehicles loaded with sand and 2 JCB machines have been seized and it was found that mining transit challan produced by the drivers was found to be genuine, whereas, transit challan produced by the driver of vehicle no. JH-02S-4522 and JH-02-AC-4880 were found to be genuine, but the time has expired and accordingly the vehicles have been seized and details of all the vehicles have been given in the FIR and seizure list thereof has been prepared which clearly goes to show that the truck of this petitioner was carrying coal.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the truck of the petitioner was carrying coal on the basis of valid documents. He further submits that some delay has occurred in payment while taking diesel from Mansarovar Service Station, Demotand. He also submits that, however, a petition for release of the vehicle and for release of the coal was filed by the petitioner which was rejected and subsequently affirmed in the criminal revision. He submits that he is not claiming release of coal. He further submits that this vehicle is commercial in nature and the trial has not been concluded as yet. He further submits that there is provision of confiscation of the seized article in terms of Section 21(4-A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. He further submits that confiscation is required to be done once the trial is concluded and the petitioner is found to be guilty in the trial. He also submits that in view of amendment in Rule 54(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 which was incorporated in Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. By virtue Rule 54(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, the petitioner is required to pay the double amount of the minerals and the goods in question can be released.

7. Learned counsel for the State submits that in light of Rule 54(5) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, the petitioner is the owner of the minerals and he is required to pay the double amount of minerals and the arrangement has been granted in the said Rule how to deposit. He further submits that for release of the vehicle, the petitioner is required to follow the procedure as an interim measure.

8. Since the petitioner is not claiming the coal, there is no need to deposit the double amount if the coal in question is not being claimed by the petitioner. For the sake of convenience, Section 21(4-A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957) is quoted hereinbelow:

“21.