PRAMOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition has been filed under Sec. 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by the petitioner assailing the order dtd. 23/09/2025 passed by the Special Judge Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957/Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, in MJC Cri No.64/2025 whereby the learned Court has rejected the petitioner's application seeking interim custody of the petitioner's vehicle i.e. Trolley bearing Registration No.CG-11-AR-5734.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are as projected by the petitioner are that on 16/6/2025, during a routine inspection conducted in the local area, officials intercepted the vehicle and seized it on the allegation of transportation of sand without production of valid documents at the spot. On the basis of the said allegation, Police Station Chakarbhatha registered Crime No. 249/2025 for offences under Ss. 4(1), 4(1)(A), and 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, and Ss. 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. After seizure, the vehicle has been kept in open premises at the Police Station, exposed to weather conditions, resulting in continuous deterioration of its mechanical parts. Accordingly, the Petitioner moved an application under Sec. 503 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 before the Court of the Special Judge (Mines and Minerals Act), Bilaspur, seeking interim custody of the vehicle on supurdnama, submitting that he is the registered owner and is ready and willing to furnish adequate security and abide by any conditions imposed by the Court. In the said application, the Petitioner submitted that he is the lawful and registered owner of the vehicle, that the vehicle is required for his agricultural and household purposes, and that the sand in question had already been procured earlier for the construction of a residential house sanctioned under a Central Government housing scheme, and was only being shifted locally from a temporary storage point to the construction site. The Petitioner further submitted that continued seizure of the vehicle in the open is causing avoidable wear and damage to the vehicle and that he is prepared to produce the vehicle before the concerned authorities as and when required. The petitioner also submitted the Mineral Transit Pass No. 9295641. By order dtd. 23/9/2025, the Learned Special Judge (Mines and Minerals Act), Bilaspur, rejected the Petitioner's application for interim custody of the said vehicle. Hence this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that learned Court, while rejecting the application for interim custody, did not record any finding disputing or discrediting the Petitioner's status as the registered owner of the vehicle. He would next contend that it is a trite law where ownership is undisputed and the vehicle is not required for evidentiary purposes in its present form, interim custody ordinarily ought to be granted subject to suitable conditions, so as to prevent deterioration of the property during pendency of proceedings. He would next contend that the sand in question had already been procured and delivered earlier for the construction of a residential house sanctioned under a Central Government housing scheme, and that the vehicle was being used only for short-distance shifting from a temporary storage location. The Petitioner had not been alleged to be transporting sand for sale, trade, or commercial distribution. The impugned order, therefore, fails to appreciate the non-commercial, domestic nature of the alleged transportation. He would lastly contend that it is also a settled legal position that vehicles seized in connection with alleged offences are not required to be retained in open custody, where their continued detention would result in deterioration of condition and consequent loss of value. In support of his contention he placed reliance upon the law laid down by the the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283, wherein it has been categorically held that seized vehicles should ordinarily be released on interim custody, subject to safeguards, to avoid avoidable damage and depreciation during pendency of proceedings, hence the vehicle i.e. Trolley bearing Registration No.CG-11-AR-5734 may kindly be released on supurdnama.