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

2015 Supreme(All) 909

PANKAJ NAQVI
AWADHESH TRIPATHI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Jitendra Prasad Mishra for the Revisionist; A.G.A.for the Opposite Party.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.

Heard Sri Jitendra Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for revisionist and learned A.G.A.

This criminal revision is preferred against the order dated 31.3.2015, passed by A.C.J.M.-I, Banda in Criminal Misc. Case No.580/XII/2015 (State v. Raj Kumar), under Section 207 M.V. Act and 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, P.S. Atarra, Banda, rejecting an application for release of the vehicle.

1. The revisionist claims to be the registered owner of Tata Truck-1613, bearing registration no. UP-78-AT 0427, which was alleged to be carrying sand more than the prescribed limit on 26.2.2015. The truck was seized and given in the custody of S.H.O., P.S. Atarra. The revisionist filed an application for release of the vehicle before the Magistrate concerned on 2.3.2015. The Mines Department on 4.3.2015 reported to the Magistrate that the truck was involved in an offence under Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (fort short "the M.M.D.R. Act") and Rule 70(2) of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 (for short "the Rules") and after realizing Rs.27,700/- as royalty, value of mineral / penalty,










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