Pankaj Naqvi, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Jitendra Prasad Mishra, learned Counsel for revisionist and learned A.G.A. This criminal revision is preferred against the order dated 31.3.2015, passed by A.C.J.M. -I, Banda in Criminal Misc. Case No. 580/XII/2015, State v. Raj Kumar, under section 207 M.V. Act and 4/21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, P.S. Atarra, Banda, rejecting an application for release of the vehicle. The revisionist claims to be the registered owner of Tata Truck -1613, bearing registration No. UP -78 -AT 0427, which was alleged to be carrying sand more than the prescribed limit on 26.2.2015. The truck was seized and given in the custody of S.H.O., P.S. Atarra. The revisionist filed an application for release of the vehicle before the Magistrate concerned on 2.3.2015. The Mines Department on 4.3.2015 reported to the Magistrate that the truck was involved in an offence under section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (fort short "the M.M.D.R. Act") and Rule 70(2) of the U.P. Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 (for short "the Rules") and after realizing Rs. 27,700/ - as royalty, value of mineral/penalty, it be released. The learned Magistrate refused the release of the truck on the ground of absence of any complaint pending under section 22 of the Act. The M.M.D.R. Act and 1963 Rules framed thereunder are special enactments relating to development and regulation of mines and minerals. The first endeavour of the Court should be to trace the power of release, if any, of a thing/article including a vehicle involved in the commission of offence under the Act/Rules and only in absence thereof, recourse be taken to the provisions contained in the Cr.P.C.
(2.) SECTION 21(4) of the Act provides that whenever any person raises, transports or caused to be raised or transported, without any lawful authority, any mineral from any land and for that purpose, uses any tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing, such mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing shall be liable to be seized by an officer or authority specially empowered in this behalf. Sub -section (4 -A) provides that anything seized under sub -section (4), shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of the Court competent to take cognizance of the offence under sub -section (1) and shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such Court. Similarly, section 22 relates to cognizance of offences, which provides that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any Rules made thereunder except upon a complaint in writing made by a person authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government. A conjoint reading of sub -sections (4) and (4 -A) of section 21 of the Act, would manifest that an officer or authority, especially empowered under the Act, is conferred with a power to seize any mineral, tool, equipment, vehicle or any other thing, if the same is being transported or causes to be raised without any lawful authority and upon a seizure by such an officer or an authority, as indicated above, the Court competent to take cognizance of the offence under sub -section (1) of section 21, is also competent to confiscate the aforesaid articles/things and thereafter the said article or thing shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such Court.
(3.) ANALYZING sub -sections (4) and (4 -A) of section 21 of the Act, position which emerges is that upon a seizure of a tool, equipment, vehicle, etc. being reported by an officer or an authority empowered under the Act, the tool, equipment, vehicle, etc. are not only liable to be confiscated by an order of the Court which is competent to take cognizance of the offence, but the same (articles/things) shall also be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such Courts.;