2.The contention of the petitioner is that in this case, the first petitioner is the owner of the lorry and the second petitioner is the driver of the lorry. The lorry bearing Registration No.TN 75 BB 1334 was intercepted by the respondent police during their routine road check on 05.12.2024 at about 11.00 a.m., and it was found that the petitioner's Lorry is loaded with mineral stones at about 06.00 p.m., on 04.12.2024 to reach the distance of 90 kms before 06.00 a.m.. But on the way, the two tires of the lorry got puncture and later the lorry tires were removed and it took some time. Hence, the lorry was proceeded beyond the permit hours and the same was considered as though the lorry was transporting stones without permit and hence, the lorry was seized. Further, in this case, the registration of FIR was itself registered with a delay of 9 hours however, no explanation has been given. He added to his submission that in the case involving of mines and minerals, the respondent police cannot register the case. Hence, the petitioners filed this petition seeking to quash the complaint.
