JUDGMENT : (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) : Heard the parties. 2. This Writ Petition (Cr.) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer for grant of an appropriate writ (s)/order (s)/direction (s) for quashing the order dated 07.02.2023 passed in Confiscation Case No.12 of 2022 whereby and where under the respondent No.2- Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa has confiscated the Hywa vehicle bearing registration No. JH O5AX 4407 which was seized in connection with Noaumundi P.S. Case No.04 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 414, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 and 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 as well as Rule 9 and 11 of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 and for release of the said vehicle. 3. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner is the owner of the said Hywa vehicle bearing registration No. JH O5AX 4407. The same was seized on 24.01.2022 by the Mines Inspector for allegedly being involved in illegal transportation of sand, stone chips and iron ore without challan. Though in paragraph-4 of the instant writ petition it has wrongly been printed that the vehicle of the petitioner was seized by the Officer In-charge of Nouamundi Police Station rather it is the Mines Inspector who seized the vehicle in question and handed it over to the Officer In-charge of Nouamundi Police Station for safe keeping and the said vehicle is now in the premises of Nouamundi Police Station. Learned counsel for the petitioner files the certified copy of the seizure list of the said Hywa vehicle by the Mines Inspector; to substantiate this part of his submission. 4. Let the same be kept in the record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is false. The said Hywa vehicle of the petitioner never indulged in any illegal activity. After seizure of the said vehicle, the Superintendent of Police requested to the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa for initiation of proceeding in respect of the said seized Hywa vehicle bearing registration No. JH O5AX 4407. The said Hywa vehicle of the petitioner never indulged in any illegal activity. After seizure of the said vehicle, the Superintendent of Police requested to the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa for initiation of proceeding in respect of the said seized Hywa vehicle bearing registration No. JH O5AX 4407. The respondent No.2 being the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa on receipt of the said report initiated Confiscation Case No.12 of 2022 without verification of documents submitted by the petitioner; only on the basis of report submitted by the Mining Inspector and Police. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court towards Annexure-6 which is the order dated 07.02.2023 passed by Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa and submits that in the said order the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa has categorically mentioned that the said Hywa vehicle has been confiscated under the provisions of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 as well as Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws the attention of this Court towards page-22 of the brief which is the written report submitted by the Mines Inspector, and submits that the Mines Inspector has seized the said vehicle in exercise of the power under Rule 11 (i) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 inter alia for the offence punishable under Sections 4 and 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. It is next submitted that Section 21 (4A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 envisages that the vehicle seized under 21 (4A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 can be confiscated and disposed of only by the order of a court competent to take cognizance of the offence and in this case the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa was not the competent court for taking cognizance of any of the offences as alleged in the F.I.R. and for which F.I.R. has been registered nor any order has been passed by any court of competent jurisdiction for disposal of the vehicle in question. It is next submitted that the Deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to confiscate the vehicle. It is next submitted that the Deputy Commissioner has no jurisdiction to confiscate the vehicle. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this writ petition be allowed by granting an appropriate writ (s)/order (s)/direction (s) for quashing the order dated 07.02.2023 passed in Confiscation Case No.12 of 2022 whereby and where under the respondent No.2- Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa has confiscated the Hywa vehicle bearing registration No. JH O5AX 4407 which was seized in connection with Noaumundi P.S. Case No.04 of 2022 and the said vehicle be releases in favour of the petitioner. 6. Learned AC to AAG-III appearing for the State submits that the prayer of the petitioner is covered by the judgment passed by this Court in other cases. Hence, the State has no objection to the prayer as made by the petitioner in this Writ Petition. 7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is appropriate to refer to Section 21 (4A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 which reads as under:- “21. (4A) 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” A bare perusal of the said provision makes it abundantly clear that inter alia any vehicle seized under the 21 (4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 can be confiscated by an order of the court competent to take cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 21 (1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. 8. Undisputedly, the vehicle in question was seized under Section 21 (4) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in the absence of any order of the court competent to take cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 21 (1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, was not competent to confiscate the vehicle in question. Hence, in the considered opinion of this Court the Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in the absence of any order of the court competent to take cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 21 (1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, was not competent to confiscate the vehicle in question. Hence, the order dated 07.02.2023 passed by Deputy Commissioner; West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Confiscation Case No.12 of 2022 is not sustainable in law. 9. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case where a writ of certiorari be issued quashing the said order dated 07.02.2023 passed by Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Confiscation Case No.12 of 2022. 10. Hence, issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 07.02.2023 passed by Deputy Commissioner, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa in Confiscation Case No.12 of 2022. 11. So far as the prayer for release of the said Hywa vehicle bearing registration No. JH O5AX 4407 is concerned, the petitioner may approach the competent court by filing appropriate application for release of the said vehicle in accordance with law. 12. This Writ Petition (Cr.) stands allowed with aforesaid observation. 13. Order accordingly.