Dismissed

Ramesh Prajapat S/O Shri Mangi Lal Prajapat B/C Prajapat v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC6 Nov 2020CRLMP/949/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought release of a seized JCB allegedly used for illegal mining in Rajasthan. The court held that the vehicle need not be released immediately but granted mining authorities one month to initiate confiscation proceedings under Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules. If initiated, the Magistrate must hold the vehicle; otherwise, the petitioner can apply for a search warrant.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted one month to initiate confiscation proceedings under Rule 54 of Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1917.

Ramesh Prajapat S/O Shri Mangi Lal Prajapat B/C… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

(1 of 2)

¶2

[CRLMP-949/2020]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶4

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 949/2020

¶5

Ramesh Prajapat S/o Shri Mangi Lal Prajapat, R/o Gram Pipaliya, Tehsil Nenwa, District Bundi, Raj.

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Balwada For Respondent(s) : Mr. F.R.Meena, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶12

Order

¶13

06/11/2020

¶14

The present petition relate to release of vehicle, which is in the nature of JCB.

¶15

Learned Public Prosecutor points out that this vehicle is purely being used for mining purpose and admittedly, it was seized when the concerned Officer found it doing illegal mining.

¶16

However, although learned counsel for the petitioner assert the fact that even as on today, confiscation proceedings have not been undertaken, but the Mining Engineer (Writ) and the learned Public Prosecutor submit that this vehicle ought not be released as it would encourage illegal mining and it is in the process for confiscation.

¶17

This Court is of the firm view that in those circumstances, illegal mining should be allowed and if such vehicles, which was used for mining purpose, is released at the interim stage, it would obviously be used for mining alone. Thus, if the Mining Authorities

¶18

(2 of 2)

¶19

[CRLMP-949/2020]

¶20

has seized it and intend to initiate action in terms of Rule 54 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1917, one month’s time is granted to them to initiate action and do necessary confiscation proceedings. If such confiscation proceedings are undertaken in accordance with law laid down in the case of Laxman Versus State of Rajasthan : DB Criminal Misc. Petition No. 60/2018 decided on 6.4.2018, the concerned Magistrate shall not release the vehicle. However, if no confiscation proceedings are undertaken even within one month from today, the petitioner(s) shall be free to move a fresh application under Section 457 Cr.P.C. before the concerned Magistrate, who will examine the same independently.

¶21

Granting liberty aforesaid, this petition is dismissed.

¶22

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶23

NITIN /

Ramesh Prajapat S/O Shri Mangi Lal Prajapat B/C Prajapat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Prajapat S/O Shri Mangi Lal Prajapat B/C Prajapat v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

X a Victim Vs State of Rajasthan

Gandharv Singh S/O Shri Ramchitra B/C Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Natwar Lal S/O Madan Mohan B/C Bairagi Vs State of Rajasthan

Girdhari Son of Shri Hari Vs State of Rajasthan

Nafees S/O Latif B/C Gaddi Muslman Vs State of Rajasthan

Vinita W/O Late Fateh Singh Vs State of Rajasthan