Safikul Shekh Alias Sariful Shekh Vs the… — Mining and Natural Resources | Jharkhand HC (2024)

Safikul Shekh Alias Sariful Shekh Vs the… — Mining and Natural Resources | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed and disposed of: confiscation order dated 11.11.2022 (Confiscation Case No. 23 of 2022-23) set aside; truck bearing registration number WB-65-C-0172 directed to be released to the petitioner on furnishing indemnity bond and complying with the stated conditions, subject to the final result of the criminal proceeding.

Issue for consideration

Whether the confiscation order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj in Confiscation Case No. 23 of 2022-23, founded on Rule 11(v)/11(V) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 (declared ultra vires by the Division Bench), can stand. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the Deputy Commissioner exercised jurisdiction based solely on Rule 11(V) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, which stands declared ultra vires by the Division Bench of this Court (order dated 02.07.2024 in W.P.(C) No. 6788 of 2023), the confiscation order dated 11.11.2022 is set aside.

Ratio / Principle

It is the court having power to take cognizance that can confiscate the vehicle in question, in view of sub-section 4A of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.

Key takeaways

The vehicle shall be released in favour of the petitioner on his undertaking, subject to conditions including furnishing an indemnity bond to the satisfaction of the court below and a surety who is a resident and owner of a commercial vehicle of District Sahibganj.ratio¶16
The aforesaid release conditions are subject to the final result of the criminal proceeding.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (criminal) allowed. The Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, in Confiscation Case No. 23 of 2022-23, had ordered confiscation of the petitioner's truck (Regn. No. WB-65-C-0172) seized in Radhanagar P.S. Case No. 120 of 2022 (IPC Ss. 175, 379; MMDR Act S. 21(1), 21(6); JJMC Rules 57, 4/57) on allegation of carriage of 900 CFT stone chips. Holding that the Deputy Commissioner had acted solely on Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, which stood declared ultra vires by the Division Bench of the High Court by order dated 02.07.2024 in W.P.(C) No. 6788 of 2023, and that confiscation lies with the court competent to take cognizance in view of sub-section (4A) of Section 21, MMDR Act 1957, the Single Judge set aside the confiscation order and directed release of the vehicle to the petitioner on his undertaking — indemnity bond to the satisfaction of the court below, one surety being a resident owner of a commercial vehicle of District Sahibganj, no sale/mortgage/transfer or tampering with identification, production as directed by the Trial Court — such conditions being subject to the final result of the criminal proceeding.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr.) No. 438 of 2024

Safikul Shekh @ Sariful Shekh, aged about 29 years, Son of Late Akash Ali, Resident of Dumri Pahar, P.O.Udhwa, P.S.-Radhanagar, Dist.-Sahibganj.

..... … Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S.-Sahibganj, Dist. Sahibganj. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahibganj, Dist. Sahibganj. 4. The District Mining Officer, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahibganj, Dist. Sahibganj. 5. The District Transport Officer, Sahibganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahibganj, Dist.- Sahibganj. 6. Officer In-Charge, Radhanagar, P.O. & P.S.Radhanagar, Dist.-Sahibganj.

..... … Respondents

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Farooque Ansari, Advocate. : Md. Asadul Haque, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Deepankar,, A.C. to G.A.-III. ------

05/ 27.08.2024 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents-State.

Prayer in this petition is made for quashing of the order dated 11.11.2022, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, in Confiscation Case No. 23 of 2022-23, whereby direction has been issued to confiscate the truck of the petitioner, bearing registration number WB-65-C-0172, in connection with Radhanagar P.S. Case No. 120 of 2022.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the aforesaid vehicle and the case has been registered under Sections 175 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 21(1), 21(6) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Rules-57 and 4/57 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004. He submits that the allegations are made that on the said vehicle, 900 CFT stone chips was being carried. He further submits that Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of

-1-

Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 has been declared ultra vires by the Division Bench of this Court by order dated 02.07.2024 passed in W.P. (C) No.6788 of 2023. He further submits that the confiscation can only be made by a court, who is competent to take cognizance in the light of sub-section 4A of the Section 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-State submits that the said Rule has been declared ultra vires by the division bench of this court.

In view of the above, and based on Rule 11(V) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj has exercised its jurisdiction, which itself declared ultra vires by the division bench of this court by order dated 02.07.2024 passed in W.P. (C) No.6788 of 2023. In view of sub-section 4A of Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 the Court having the power of taking cognizance or can confiscate the vehicle in question.

As such, the order dated 11.11.2022, passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Sahibganj, in Confiscation Case No. 23 of 2022-23, whereby direction has been issued to confiscate the truck of the petitioner, bearing registration number WB-65-C-0172, in connection with Radhanagar P.S. Case No. 120 of 2022, is hereby, set aside.

So far as the release of the aforementioned vehicle is concerned, the same shall be released in favour of the petitioner on his undertaking on the following terms and conditions:-

(i) The petitioner shall furnish an indemnity bond to the satisfaction of the court below.

(ii) One of the surety must be a resident and owner of a commercial vehicle of District Sahibganj (Jharkhand).

(iii) That the petitioner shall not sale, mortgage or transfer the ownership of the vehicle on hire purchase agreement or mortgage in any manner.

(iv) They shall not change or tamper with the

-2-

identification of the vehicle in any manner.

(v) They shall produce the vehicle as and when directed by the Trial Court.

The aforesaid conditions are the subject to the final result of

the criminal proceeding.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ

petition is allowed and disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Amitesh/-

-3-