IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18404 of 2011 Rajesh Raman Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 02/ 09-09-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner, Rajesh Raman has filed the instant petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for release of dumper bearing registration no.BR-O8G-1127. Raj Kishore Singh, Mining Inspector along with police personnel conducted a raid at Shankarpur Pahar where illegal mining was going on by one Haldhar Yadav who at an earlier occasion was a lessee and truck, dumper, tractor, drilling machine and other items were seized from there engaged in the aforesaid illegal mining and its transportation. Contention on behalf of the petitioner is that the aforesaid seizure happens to be illegal in the background that petitioner’s dumper was hired by aforesaid Haldhar Yadav and on account thereof petitioner had no knowledge regarding illegal mining being carried out by the aforesaid Haldhar Yadav. Further submitted that on account of seizure of the dumper he is sustaining recurring loss. Also submitted that no confiscation proceeding has been initiated by the concerned 2 department as is evident from Annexure-2, the letter sent by the Mining Department to the CJM as requisitioned. Also submitted that in light of the Hon’ble Apex Court’s direction as reported in AIR 2003 SC 638, petitioner’s prayer is fit to be allowed. On the other hand, learned APP opposed the prayer and submitted that though Annexure-2 is there but it did not disclose whether any confiscation has been launched or not. From perusal of relevant Annexures it is evident that petitioner failed to get his grievance redressed from the court of learned CJM as well as from the court of learned Sessions Judge where apart from petitioner others have also filed Cr.Revision and a consolidated order was passed vide order dated 24.03.2011 in connection with Cr.Revision Nos. 42/11, 46/11 and 47/11. So far as averments of Annexure-2 is concerned, from perusal of the same it is evident that Mining Officer had requested the court concerned to take proper steps in accordance with law instead of disclosing whether any confiscation proceeding has been launched or not. The Hon’ble Apex Court in a decision reported in AIR 2003 SC 638 at paragraph-17 has held as follows:- “ “ In our view, whatever be the situation, it is 3 of no use to keep such seized vehicles at the police stations for a long period. It is for the Magistrate to pass appropriate orders immediately by taking appropriate bond and guarantee as well as security for return of the said vehicles, if required at any point of time. This can be done pending hearing of applications for return of such vehicles” Therefore the prayer of the petitioner is allowed. Learned court below is directed to release the dumper bearing registration no. BR-08G-1127 in favour of the petitioner after verifying the original owner book, tax token, insurance, road permit etc on a bank guarantee of Rs.5 Lacs with two sureties in connection with Munger Mufassil P.S. Case No. 01 of 2011, G.R. No.40 of 2011 registered under Section 379, 504, 420 of the IPC and Section 4 M.M.R.D Act as well as, 4/40 BMMC Rule, 1972. Petitioner will furnish an undertaking that he will not change the owner-ship till continuance of the proceeding as well as will produce the vehicle whenever and wherever is required by the court. perwez (Aditya Kumar Trivedi,J.) 4