SUBHASHCHANDRA BECHANLAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed for the purpose of seeking following reliefs:

(2.) It is the case of the petitioners that the vehicles in question i.e. Truck Nos.MH 46 AR 2005 AND MH AF 5086 were intercepted and seized by respondent No.2 i.e. Police Sub-Inspector on 4.2.2018 under the provisions of Sections 3, 181, 130(3), 177 &207 of the Motor Vehicles Act, essentially on the ground that driver was having papers with respect to the vehicles. The prime contention which has been raised by learned advocate appearing For the Petitioners is that though there was NOC obtained from the Geology and Mines Department for the purpose of issuing NOC by RTO, the vehicles in question are seized solely on the ground of having papers. In fact, the vehicles in question are having all valid documents with regard to the ownership and its registration and were in use for the purpose of transporting minerals. So much so that respondent No.3 has issued instruction on 14.3.2013 and 7.7.2014 to all concerned officers of Police Department of entire State of Gujarat to the effect that Police Department has no power, authority or jurisdiction to prevent the vehicle and seize. Despite the same, in exercise of power under Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act, the vehicles in question are seized. It has also been contended that apart from respondent No.2 being police authority having no authority to seize the vehicle but, even respondent No.4 cannot ask for NOC of Geology and Mines Department, because of said action is beyond the powers of the authority. However, by raising such contentions, ultimate request is made to see that the vehicles in question can be released, forthwith.

(3.) For the purpose of strengthening his submission, learned advocate appearing For the Petitioners, has contended that in an identical situation, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has on 26.8.2015 in SCA No.13800 of 2015, upon analyzing, has concluded that action to seize the vehicle by respondent No.2 authority which falls under Section 207 of the Act, is without the authority and the head constable or police authority is competent to seize the vehicle. Since the issue is stated to have been covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court and relying upon the submissions made by learned advocate For the Petitioners, the Court deems it proper to consider the case of the petitioners and order to release the vehicles. Keeping in mind these averments made in Grounds (i) and (j) of the petition, this Court deems it proper to release the vehicles in question on following conditions :