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

2025 Supreme(MP) 854

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Anand Pathak and Pushpendra Yadav, JJ.
Ravi Mohan Trivedi v. State of M.P.
Writ Petition No. 10564 of 2024 (G); Decided on 8.9.2025*

Advocates Appeared:
Harish Dixit with Dharmendra Dwivedi for petitioner; Ankur Modi, Additional Advocate General for respondents/State.

Headnote:

Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 457 -- custody of seized property -- sand in possession of petitioner seized by Mining Department illegally on allegations of illegal storage -- released after 10 years on order of High Court -- petitioner entitled to get custody of sand -- electronic transit pass issued many times but for very limited period -- petitioner unable to sell and lift huge amount of sand within such short span of time -- travesty of justice reflected -- respondents directed to issue e-TP immediately for six months so that petitioner can lift sand without any problem. [Paras 11 to 14]

naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 457 & vfÒx`ghr laifÙk dh vfÒj{kk & ;kph d¢ dCts dh jsr voSèk ÒaMkj.k d¢ vfÒdFku¨a ij [kuu foÒkx }kjk voSèk :i ls vfÒx`ghr & nl o"kZ i'pkr~ mPp U;k;ky; d¢ vkns'k ls NksM+h xbZ & ;kph jsr dh vfÒj{kk çkIr djus dk gdnkj & bysDVªkWfud vfÒogu ikji= vusd ckj tkjh fd, x, ijarq vR;ar lhfer dkykofèk d¢ fy, & ;kph brus vYidky esa jsr dh fo'kky ek=k fcØh djus rFkk mBkus esa vleFkZ & U;k; dk vigkl ifjyf{kr & çR;FkÊx.k d¨ rRdky Ng ekl d¢ fy, bysDVªkWfud vfÒogu ikji= tkjh djus dk funs'k fn;k x;k rkfd ;kph fdlh leL;k d¢ fcuk jsr mBk ld¢A ¼iSjk 11 ls 14½

ORDER

Pathak, J:-- 1. The petitioner has filed present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

i) That, respondent No.4 may kindly be directed to reactive account of the petitioner for generating e-TP for 1,94,516 Cubic Meter sand within a stipulated period.

ii) That, the order dated 18.3.2024 Annexure P/18 may kindly be modified by deleting condition of 15 days i.e. from 19.3.2024 to 3.4.2024.

iii) Costs of this petition may also be directed to be paid by the respondents.

iv) Any other suitable direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be perused.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was granted license by the Licensing Authority vide order dt.4.1.2012 for stocking sand for a period of five years (from 4.1.2012 to 3.1.2017) on the land situate on survey no.435, 1218,1742 and 1665 of village Barahi, Tehsil and District Bind. After the inspection of sand storage of the petitioner on 13.7.2013, a show cause notice was issued to him by the Mining Department on 16.7.2013, reply of which was submitted on 19.07.2013. An offence under rule 18 of the Madhya Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) rules, 2006 (hereinafter shall be referred to as the rules of 2006) was registered against the petitioner and an order for compounding the offence was passed by the Collector District Bhind on 8.8.2013, which was challenged by the petitioner before Commissioner Chambal Division by filing appeal and the same was decided vide order dt.21.1.2014.

3. Thereafter, petitioner submitted an application under section 457 of Cr.P.C. on 13.3.2014 before the Magistrate for custody of sand. Trial Court vide order dt.2.4.2014 passed in Cr.Case No.1792/2013 directed respondents Collector District Bhind and Mining Officer District Bhind for handing over custody of 01,94,516 cubic meter sand to the petitioner.

4. Against the said order, State Govt. filed Cri.Revision No.107/2014 before First Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind, which was dismissed vide order dt.4.3.2015, against which State Govt. filed W.P.No.6560/2015 before this Court. Vide order dt. 29.9.2021 petition was dismissed. Thereafter, trial Court passed the order dt.8.6.2022 directing the respondents to hand over possession of the sand to the petitioner.

5. Since the petitioner could not lift/transport sand from one place to another without a Transit Pass which is to be issued electronically (e-TP), therefore, he requested respondents for issuing e-TP but of no avail. Hence, he filed W.P.No.2403/2023, in which due to the orders passed by this Court on 19.4.2023 and 24.4.2023, respondents issued e-TP to the petitioner for sand in question and ultimately vide order dt.1.5.2023 petition was disposed of.

6. Thereafter, petitioner undertook cleaning of the area as it was seized for more than 10 years and in the meantime Bhind Etawah Bridge on Chambal river was closed, due to which the petitioner was not able to find customers and lift the sand. As per the software of the portal, if the e-TP is not used within 30 days of its activation, then it gets deactivated automatically. Therefore, after finding buyers for sand, when the petitioner tried to generate e-TP on 7.10.2023, a prompt came on the portal of the department that validity of the account has expired and e-TP can not be generated. Petitioner submitted application on 7.10.2023 itself for reactivating account for generating e-TP. Vide order dt.22.12.2023, it was directed that it is the Collector who has to take steps for issuing e-TP.

7. Pursuant to aforesaid order, petitioner appeared before the Collector on 5.1.2024 and submitted application for reactivating portal for generation of e-TP, but no action was taken. Petitioner submitted repeated applications, but no order was passed, therefore, he filed W.P.No.4895/2024 before this Court seeking relief of reactivating portal for issue of e-TP

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