Order

1. The present criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, challenging the order dated 28.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Asind, District Bhilwara, whereby the application preferred by the petitioner for release of the vehicle (dumper bearing registration No. RJ 06-GD-6355, seized in connection with FIR No. 67/2026 registered at Police Station Asind, District Bhilwara, for offences under Sections 303(2) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, was allowed, however, certain conditions were imposed and the petitioner was ordered to deposit a bank guarantee of Rs.5,21,000/- and to furnish a bond of Rs.50,00,000/- subject to the condition that until the final disposal of the case the petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle in quesiton.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the owner of the dumper vehicle bearing the aforementioned registration and chassis number, which was wrongfully detained by Police Station Asind on false allegations of illegal transportation and storage of sand, and such information was subsequently forwarded to the Mining Department, Bhilwara, pursuant to which the competent authority seized the said vehicle and kept it stationed in an open premises at Asind.

2.1. The petitioner approached the learned court below seeking release of the vehicle on supurdginama, and the learned court, vide order dated 28.04.2026, allowed the said application after hearing both parties but imposed certain onerous conditions, including deposit of an amount as stipulated in the said order, and being aggrieved by the imposition of such conditions in the impugned order dated 28.04.2026, the Petitioner has preferred the present misc. petition before this Hon’ble Court

3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition may be disposed of in terms of the ratio given in the judgment rendered in Chaina Ram vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 597/2024) decided on 19.05.2025. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are reproduced hereinbelow:

“6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the material available on record.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having perused the judgments of the coordinate Benches of this Court particularly in the cases of Kishore Singh (supra), Narayan Gadri (supra) and M/s Mahadev Construction (supra), this Court finds that the controversy involved in the present batch of criminal misc. petitions has already been set to rest and is no longer res integra. Therefore, the petitions in hand are to be decided in accordance with the parameters laid down in these judgments.

8. Consequently, it is held that under the mining laws, the state authorities have the powers for initiating confiscation proceedings in relation to the vehicles seized for violation of the mining laws. It is once, the confiscation proceedings are initiated, the vehicle cannot be released on supurdaginama as prayed by few of the petitioners. However, the said vehicles can only be released on payment of penalty and compounding fees. Whereas, the vehicles qua which no confiscation proceedings have yet been commenced, the competent criminal Court can handover interim custody of the vehicles to its true owner as a criminal Court is not supposed to keep a vehicle detained until the confiscation proceedings are commenced and concluded by the mining department.

9. It is however, made clear that in the cases where criminal Court had handed over interim custody of the vehicles to its true owners on supurdaginama, the mining department shall be free to pass confiscation orders and take back the vehicles in accordance with law.

10. The present batch of criminal misc. petitions is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the competent Court for filing fresh applications for release of t