ASHA DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 14/12/2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.6782/2020 which has been filed for release of Tata 709 vehicle bearing registration no.JH02M7671 which has been seized in connection with Ormanjhi PS Case No.2009/19 corresponding to G.R. No.2332/21 which has been lodged for the offence punishable under Sec. 379/34 of the IPC, sec. 54 and 4 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules and Ss. 8,9 of Jharkhand Mineral Dealers Rules, 2007 whereby the application of the petitioner has been dismissed as not maintainable which is pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

(2.) Mr. Avishek Prasad, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not the owner of the stone chips in question which was being transported in the vehicle of this petitioner. He submits that, however, a petition for release of the vehicle was filed by the respective owner. He submits that this vehicle is commercial in nature and the trial has not been concluded as yet. He further submits that there is provision of confiscation of the seized article in terms of sec. 21(4-A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. He further submits that confiscation is required to be done once the trial is concluded and the petitioner is found to be guilty in the trial. He further submits that in view of amendment in Rule 54(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 which was incorporated in Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. By virtue Rule 54(5) of the Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, the petitioner is required to pay the double amount of the minerals and the goods in question can be released.

(3.) Mr. Devesh Krishna, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that in light of Rule 54(5) of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004, the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle. He further submits that for release of the vehicle, the petitioner is required to follow the procedure as an interim measure.