JUDGMENT Vivek Singh Thakur, J. - This Petition has been filed against the order passed by Ld. Sessions Judge, Sirmaur on 10.4.2017, dismissing Cr. Revision Petition No. 7-CrR/10 of 2017, preferred by present Petitioner against rejection of his application No. 35/4 of 2017, filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C., before the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nahan for releasing his JCB Machine No. HP-18B-6678, seized during investigation of the Case FIR No. 22/17, dated 10.3.2017, registered under Sections 353, 504, 506 IPC in Police Station, Kala Amb,District Sirmaur on a complaint of one Lady Forest Guard Maneesha Sesodia against one Tarsem (brother of Petitioner Nek Singh) for commission of an act with the help of JCB machine to facilitate illegal mining. 2. As per averments made in the Petition and submissions made on behalf of Petitioner, the courts below have committed illegality and injustice to the Petitioner by rejecting his application for releasing of JCB Machine on the ground that prosecution has yet to prove its case against the Petitioner and by the conclusion of trial, the JCB Machine, will be damaged on account of deterioration caused by idle parking of the said JCB, resulting irreparable loss and injury to the Petitioner which cannot be compensated in terms of money. 3. Respondent-State has filed reply and also status report through SHO, Police Station, Kala Amb, District Sirmaur. On the basis of status report as well as reply filed on behalf of respondent-State, Ld. Additional Advocate General submits that petitoner Nek Ram, owner of JCB Machine is real brother of one Tarsem Singh, who is Accused in present case FIR No. 22/17 and the JCB Machine in question was being used by the said Tarsem Singh for the purpsoe of illegal mining on 10.3.2017 at about 12.30 P.M. at Roon river as with the help of the said JCB machine, Tarsem Singh was filling up the ditches/pits which were dug by the Forest Department in order to prevent transportation of mines extracted through illegal mining and on noticing it, complainant-lady Forest Guard Maneesha Sasodiya tried to restrain him from doing so, whereupon, Tarsem Singh abused and pushed her, because of which, she fell down and Tarsem Singh fled from the spot with JCB Machine, whose photograph was also taken by the complainant through her mobile. According to her, he also threatened her life. It is further submitted by ld. According to her, he also threatened her life. It is further submitted by ld. Additional Advocate General that before this incident, both brothers (Accused Tarsem Singh and Nek singh Petitioner) along with JCB Machine in question and other tipper and tractor were apprehended by the police for committing the officence of illegal mining and they are habitual offenders for committing illegal mining and in case, the JCB Machine is released, the same will be again used for committing illegal minining. Details of cases registered against the Accused Tarsem Singh and his brother Nek Singh (Petitioner), owner of JCB, mentioned in status report, referred by the Ld. Additional Advocate General for supporting the plea of State for opposition of release of JCB in question, are as under:- 1. Case No. 103/03, dated 30.05.2003, Section 341, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Nahan is pending in Gram Panchayat, Trilokpur. 2. Case No. 152/05, dated 08.08.2015, Section 323, 324, 325, 427, 452, 506 IPC, Police Station Narayangarh, District Ambala, Harayana is pending in the Court. 3. Case No. 117/06, dated 16.06.2006, Section 341, 323, 506, 451, 325, 34 IPC, Police Station Nahan, is acquitted on 26.12.2011. 4. Case No. 10/13, dated 12.01.2013, Section 341, 323 IPC, Police Station Kala Amb, is acquitted on 21.02.2014. 5. Case No. 17/13, dated 20.02.2013, Section 353, 506, 34 IPC, Police Station Kala Amb, is acquitted on 21.02.2014. 6. Case No. 03/14, dated 08.01.2014, Section 341, 323, 506B, 382, 427, 34 IPC, Police Station Kala Amb, is pending in the Court. Besides, aforesaid criminal cases registered against the Petitioner Nek Ram and his elder brother Tarsem Singh, they were also fined for illegal mining, details on which as per status report, are as under:- 1. Challan No. 6/13, dated 11.01.2013, Accused Tarsem Singh (Tractor No. PB04-4949, fine amount Rs. 5000/-). 2. Challan No. 24/15, dated 6.11.2015, Accused Nek Singh (JCB A/F, fine amount of Rs. 25,000/-). 3. Challan No. 19/16, dated 15.3.2016, Accused Nek Singh (Truck Tipper No. HP18B-6677, fine amount of Rs. 7500/-). As per status report, it has been found by the Investigating Officer that Forest Department has dug deep trinches/pits on the road leading to Roon Khad to prevent illegal mining so as to restrain vehicular traffic to the Khad (river) for the said purpose and Accused Tarsem Singh with the help of JCB Machine has been found filling these trinches/pits. As per status report, it has been found by the Investigating Officer that Forest Department has dug deep trinches/pits on the road leading to Roon Khad to prevent illegal mining so as to restrain vehicular traffic to the Khad (river) for the said purpose and Accused Tarsem Singh with the help of JCB Machine has been found filling these trinches/pits. It is further stated in the report that information about commission of illegal mining by Accused Tarsem Singh and his brother Nek Singh (Petitioner) with the help of their JCB and other vehicles used to be received by police on numerous occasions but both of them, always, flee from the spot very smartly along with their vehicles immdiately after having information about the arrival of local police in the Khad for taking action against illegal mining and on the day of incident also, Accused Tarsem Singh was found filling the Pits with JCB Machine, (registered in the name of his brother Nek Singh Petitioner), which were dug by the Forest Department to prevent the illegal mining. 4. Ld. Trial court had dismissed the application filed by the Petitioner on the ground that his JCB Machine in question and other vehicles were found involved in illegal mining and releasing of vehicle will amount to assisting the applicant to commit the crime, whereas, Ld. Sessions Judge, after considering number of cases registered against the Accused Tarsem Singh and his brother Nek Singh (Petitioner) and also the JCB Machine in question was found involved to cause the transportation of illegal mining, has dismissed the application on the ground that vehicle involved in illegal mining is liable to be seized and confiscated in view of provisions of Section 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as Act). 5. Section 4 of the Act provides that prospective or mining operations are to be under licence or lease. 5. Section 4 of the Act provides that prospective or mining operations are to be under licence or lease. Relevant provisions read as under:- "4(1) - No person shall undertake any reconnaissance, prospecting or mining operations in any area, except under and in accordance with the terms and conditions of a reconnaissance permit or of a prospecting license or, as the case may be, of a mining lease, granted under this Act and the rules made thereunder: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall affect any prospecting or mining operations undertaken in any area in accordance with the terms and conditions of a prospecting license or mining lease granted before the commencement of this Act which is in force at such commencement: Provided further that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any prospecting operations undertaken by the Geological Survey of India, the Indian Bureau of Mines, (the Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research) of the Department of Atomic Energy of the Central Government, the Directorates of Mining and Geology of any State Government (by whatever name called), and the Mineral Exploration Corporation Limited, a Government company within the meaning of clause (45) of Section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013 (18 of 2013), and any such entity that may be notified for this purpose by the Central Government: Provided also that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any mining lease (whether called mining lease, mining concessin or by any other name) in force immediately before the commencement of this Act in the Union territory of Goa, Daman and Diu." "4 (1-A) - No person shall transport or store or cause to be transported or stored any mineral otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder." 6. Relevant provisions of Section 21 of the Act providing penalty for violation of the provisions of the Act, reads as under:- "21 (4) - Whenever any person raises, transports or causes to be raised or transported, without any lawful authority, any mineral from any land, and, for that purpose, uses any tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing, such mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing shall be liable to be seized by an officer of authoirty specially empowered in this behalf." "21 (4 A)- Any mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing seized under sub-section (4), shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the Court competent to take cognizance of the offence under sub-section (1) and shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such Court." 7. Section 22 of the Act dealing with the provisions related to cognizance of offences is also relevant, which reads as under:- "No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any rules made thereunder except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government." 8. Section 21 (4) provides seizure of vehicle, used for raising, transporting or causing to raise or transport without any lawful authority any mineral from any land, by an officer of the authority specially empowered for doing so. According to Section 21 (4-A), the said vehicle shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the Court competent to take cognizance of the offence under sub-section (1) of Section 21 and shall be disposed of in accordance with direction of such Court. 9. In exercise of the powers conferred under Sub-Section (2) of Section 26 read with Section 21 (4) of Act, State of Himachal Pradesh has issued Notification No. Ind-II(F)6-20/2005, dated Shimla-2, the 30.4.2011, empowering/authorizing numerous officers including all the Station House Officers of local Police Stations and all the Sub Inspectors/Assistant Sub Inspectors (Police Post Incharge) in Himachal Pradesh to seize any mineral raised or transported or caused to be raised or transported by any person withount any lawful authority, any mineral from any land and any tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing used for that purpose. In exercise of power conferred under Sub-Section (2) of Section 26 read with Section 22 of the Act, State of Himachal Pradesh has issued notification vide No. Ind-II (F)6-20/2005, dated Shimla-2, the 30.04.2011, authorizing all the Station House Officers of local Police Stations and all the Sub Inspectors/Assistant Sub Inspectors (Police Post Incharge) in Himachal Pradesh to make complaint in writing in the Court of competent jurisdiction in respect of any offence punishable under the Act or any rules made there under. 10. From aforesaid porvisons of the Act and notifications issued by the State of Himachal Pradesh, it is evident that SHO of Police Station Kala Amb was competent to seize the vehicle under Section 21 (4) and was also authorized to file complaint under Section 22 of the Act against the Accused so as to enabling the court to take cognizance of the offence committed under the Act. 11. Section 21 (4) of the Act provides that seizure of the vehicle even it is found causing to transport minerals by illegal mining. In the present case, as per status report, vehicle of the Petitioner was involved in facilitating the illegal mining which amounts to cause to transport mineral extracted by illegal mining and, therefore, provisions of the Act are attracted in the present case. However, despite having found that Accused along with the JCB Machine was involved in facilitating commission of illegal mining, to the reasons best known to the police, challan has only been presented under Section 353, 504 and 506 of IPC. 12. Despite taking specific stand particularly in reply and status report filed by the respondent-State, Accused Tarsem Singh and the JCB Machine in question was involved an act in commission of offence under Section 4 (1) and 4 (1-A) of the Act, for extraneous reasons, the police/concerned authority has chosen not to file challan/complaint under the Act against the Accused for committing an offence facilitating or causing to transport the extract of illegal mining, may be for negligence, lack of knowledge or to cooperate the offender or any other reason best known to the police. Therefore, Superintendent of Police, Sirmaur at Nahan is directed to look into the matter personally; and after proper and complete investigation within 15 days after receipt of this order; if required, ensure filing of supplementary challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C/Complaint under the provisions of the Act against the Accused for commission of offence under Section 4 (1) and 4 (1-A) of the Act and also for using the JCB Machine in question for commission of the said offence. 13. At present, though pressed in Oral submissions and stated in the status report that vehicle in question was involved in an act related to illegal mining, no complaint or challan has been filed for commission of the said offence. Therefore, JCB Machine in question, if not required in any other case, is directed to be released on sapurdari bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- to be furnished by the Petitioner with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court within 4 weeks from today specifically undertaking therein not to alienate the said JCB Machine and to produce the said JCB Machine as and when directed to do so by the Court or to hand over the said JCB Machine to the competent authority/concerned agency in case the said JCB Machine is ordered to be seized and/or confiscated in present case. 14. It is also directed that in case the complaint under the act of supplementary challan invoking the provision of the Act for contravention of the said provisions filed by the competent/authorized officer then applicability of Section 21 (4) and 21 (4-A) of the Act and its effect upon the said JCB Machine shall be dealt with by the concerned Court in accordance with law on its own merit independent of observations made by this Court in present Petition.