THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 242 of 2009 Bhagirathi Devi Pathak W/o Sri Kanti Ballabh Pathak …… Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and others ..…. Respondents Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2/State. None for respondent No.3 Hon’ble J.C.S. Rawat, J. Mr. Yogesh Pacholia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 /State. None for respondent No.3. 2. This petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for setting aside the impugned order dated 28/02/2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Champawat and order dated 17/03/2009 passed by District & Sessions Judge Champawat in Criminal Revision No.5 of 2009, Smt. Bhagirathi Devi Pathak Vs. State of Uttarakhand. 3. An F.I.R. was lodged by Sri Aslam Khan, Incharge Officer, Mining, Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Limited at P.S. Tanakpur, District Champawat alleging therein that some illegal mining is being carried out and it is being loaded and carried out on two trucks bearing Nos. URN 9940 and UA03 4812 from their mining field. On the said complaint, Case Crime No. 141 of 2009 under Section 3/7/57 of the Mining Act, under Sections 379 and 411 I.P.C. and under the Motor Vehicles Act was lodged by the police and the aforesaid vehicles were seized by the police. 4. The learned Brief Holder could not demonstrate that the seizer has been carried out under the provision of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned Brief Holder could not demonstrate that Section 3/7/57 2 are the penal provisions under the Mining Act. Thus, the only act remains u/s 379 and 411 I.P.C. for seizing the vehicle. Seizer has been carried out under the provision of the Cr.P.C., as such, if the vehicles are not released that will lose its utility, as such, the vehicles can be given in the custody to the registered owner under the provisions of the Cr.P.C. 5. In view of the above, the order dated 28/02/2009 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Champawat and order dated 17/03/2009 passed by District & Sessions Judge Champawat in Criminal Revision No.5 of 2009 are set aside. The petition is liable to be allowed. 6. Let the vehicle Nos. URN 9940 and UA03 4812 be released to its registered owners on executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Champawat. The registered owners shall also furnish bonds as well as undertaking that the said vehicles will be produced during the trial as and when required and will not be disposed of to any other person during the trial. The owners shall also furnish undertaking that whenever required before the Court or authority, the vehicles shall be placed before them. 7. The petition is allowed. (J.C.S. Rawat, J.) 01.05.2009 Shiv