CRIMINAL REVISION No.12 OF 2002 ----------- Against the order dated 5.12.2001 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in Misc. Case no.39 of 2001 (Trial no.1417 of 2001). ----------- 1. GYANCHAND PANDEY, son of Sri N.D. Pandey, resident of Mohalla-Church Road, P.S.-Daltonganj, Distt.- Palamu(Jharkhand) 2. Naim Ansari, son of Sri Ramjan Ansari, resident of village- Dhanukara, P.S.-Latehar Distt.Latehar(Jharkhand)—(Petitioners) Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Transport Officer, Muzaffarpur------(Opp. Parties) -------------- For the petitioners : Mr. Dronacharya, Advocate For the State : Mr. S. Azim, A.P.P. Mr. S. Muzaffar, A.P.P. ------------------ P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH Mandhata Singh, J. Truck bearing registration no.BR-15H-1671 is seized by the District Transport Officer, Muzaffarpur, finding no road permit tax for Bihar nor additional motor vehicle tax for Bihar for which submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that seizure was made just after bifurcation of Jharkhand State from Bihar. Section 67 of the Bihar Reorganisation Act, 2000 provides for validity of the tax for the period for which it was paid earlier to bifurcation of the State and that is decided by a Division Bench of this Court also reported in 2002(1) PLJR 666 ( Manoj Sahay & ors. vrs. The State of Bihar & ors.). According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, road permit of this vehicle was valid until 24.4.2003 and tax for vehicle was paid for the period till 9.2.2002 while the truck and its papers - 2 - were seized on 15.11.2001. Besides, every documents were up-to-date with no infirmity but those documents also have been seized by the District Transport Officer, Muzaffarpur. Even then cognizance is taken without application of mind. Photostat copy of the same is on record while the originals are returned under the direction of the Hon’ble High Court made in I.A. no.319 of 2002 on 16.4.2002. It appears to me also that cognizance order is made without application of mind even mentioning of penal sections and sections under which no offence is made out. Sections 22 and 28B of the Motor Vehicles Act are not penal sections rather there is no section 28(1)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act. No doubt section 28(1)(b) of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1994 is penal one finding any fault in payment of different taxes which was lacking in the case. Thus revision application is allowed. The order dated 5.12.2001 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in Misc. Case no.39 of 2001 (Trial No.1417 of 2001) is set aside. Patna High Court, 8th September, 2009 NAFR/Sudip ( Mandhata Singh, J )