Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 595 (RAJ)

Pukhraj v. State of Rajasthan

2015-03-10

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2015
JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 5.1.2015 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur Metropolitan (hereinafter referred to as 'the revisional court') in Revision Petition No.326/2014 whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner against the order dated 12.12.2014 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. has been dismissed. 2. The trial court vide order dated 12.12.2014 rejected the application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for releasing the truck manufactured by TATA Company bearing Chesis No.697 T.C. 69 J.V.I. 110924 and Engine No.5883, which was seized by the Mining Department as it was transporting the mining minerals which was illegally excavated without paying royalty. The trial court has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 457 Cr.P.C. while observing that the truck cannot be released on supurdaginama till the petitioner pays the penalty imposed by the Mining Department. 3. The revision petition preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 12.12.2014 has also been dismissed by the revisional court while observing that the Mining Department has calculated the royalty and compounding amount to the tune of Rs. 52,700/- and in default of payment of said amount, the vehicle has been seized. It is also observed by the revisional court that the petitioners failed to show any permission for excavating mining minerals and, therefore, till the petitioner pays the amount assessed by the Mining Department, the vehicle cannot be released on supurdaginama in favour of the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is going to challenge the penalty imposed by the Mining Department by way of availing remedy of filing appeal or revision available under the provisions of Rajasthan Mining Mineral and Concession Rules, 1986, however, the final decision of appeal or revision may take some time and the new truck of the petitioner is lying in the police in exposed condition and, therefore, it may be released on supurdaginama. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner is not in a position to deposit the whole penalty amount at once and if the seized truck is released on supurdaginama, he will earn by paying the same and can also pay the penalty amount in installments. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further argued that the petitioner is not in a position to deposit the whole penalty amount at once and if the seized truck is released on supurdaginama, he will earn by paying the same and can also pay the penalty amount in installments. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned orders as well as the material available on record. 6. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has illegally excavated the mining mineral without permission of the Mining Department and has transported the same in the truck seized by the police. The Mining Department has calculated royalty and compounding amount to the tune of Rs. 52,700/-. The courts below have refused the petitioner to release the truck on supurdaginama while observing that without payment of the due amount, the vehicle cannot be released on supurdaginama in favour of the petitioner. 7. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that since the truck is lying in the police station, the petitioner is not able to pay the amount of penalty and if the same is released on supurdaginama to the petitioner, he will pay the amount of penalty in installments is having force. 8. Having considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that if the petitioner pays half amount of the total penalty i.e. Rs. 26,350/- to the Mining Department within a period of ten days and submit a proof of paying the said amount before the trial court, the trial court may release the truck bearing Chesis No.697 T.C. 69 J.V.I. 110924 and Engine No.5883 on supurdaginama to the petitioner on furnishing surety bond to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- (rupees ten lakhs) on usual conditions. It is also directed that the remaining due amount will be paid by the petitioner in two installments within a period of three months from today. If the petitioner fails to deposit the remaining installments within the stipulated period, the Mining Department can seize the truck after giving notice to the petitioner. 9. Copy of this order be sent to Mining Engineer, Mining Department, Mine and Geology Department, Circuit House Road, Jodhpur.With these observations/directions, this criminal misc. petition is disposed of. The stay petition is also disposed of.Petition disposed of. *******