RUAAB AHMED Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the order passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in Criminal Revision No. 97/14 on 27-5-14 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the Criminal Revision filed by the present applicant against the order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Katni under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. by which the learned Judicial Magistrate dismissed the application filed by the present applicant for granting interim custody of truck bearing registration No. MP-18-GA-0510. The learned Panel Lawyer states that the case diary in present case is not available as it is only a complaint (Istgasa) under Section 102 of Cr.P.C..

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition are that on 8-5-2014, Police Station, Badwara, District Katni, received an information through informant that a truck bearing registration No. MP-18-GA-0510 is coming from Umariya to Katni. In the said vehicle, illegal coal was being transported. On this information, the truck was stopped and checked by Badwara Police. The driver Rammit Yadav could not produce any valid documents and, therefore, the truck was seized under Section 102 of Cr.P.C. and Istgasa No. 1/14 was registered. Intimation of seizure of the vehicle was sent to Mining Officer of the district.

(3.) The present applicant filed an application under Section 457 of Cr.P.C. before the concerning Magistrate at Katni. The learned Magistrate rejected the application on 15-5-14 against which the revision was filed before the First Additional Sessions Judge. The Additional Sessions Judge observed that intimation was sent by the police to the authorised person under Madhya Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2006. The Rule 18 provides that the authorised person may release the property seized under sub-rule (2) of Rule 18 on execution of a bond to the satisfaction of the authorised person by the person, from whose possession such property was seized on a condition that such person shall produce the property whenever asked to do so by the authorised person. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 18 provides that the authorised person shall send intimation of such seizure to the Magistrate having jurisdiction to try such offence and proviso to sub-rule (4) provides that where report has been given to the concerning Magistrate the property seized shall be released only under the orders of such Magistrate.