KANJARIYA KHALID AHMED Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-1168
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on
April 04,2022
Kanjariya Khalid Ahmed
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF GUJARAT
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
BASAVVA KOM DYAMANGOUDA PATIL VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]SUNDERBHAI AMBALAL DESAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Rule. Learned Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent-State.
(2.)By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dtd. 12/10/2020 passed by the 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godhra, Panchmahals below Muddamal Application, as also to quash and set aside the order dated 01.12.2 02 0 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Panchmahals at Godhra, in Criminal Revision Application No.49 of 2 02 0 and to order release of the muddamal vehicles in favour of the petitioner.
(3.)Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the FIR against the petitioner is registered under Ss. 379, 114 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and under Rule 3, 21 and 22(a) of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transport and Storage) Rules, 2 017 and under Ss. 4(1)A, 21(1), 21(4) and 21(4A) of the Mines and Mineral (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the competent authority is authorized to compound the offence under the Mines and Mineral (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957.
3.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the vehicles were seized on 10/1/2020. She submitted that the petitioner and the other co-accused have preferred quashing petition by filing Special Criminal Application Nos.6890 of 2020, 6955 of 2020, 6887 of 2020, 6935 of 2020, 6997 of 2020, 6927 of 2020 and 6956 of 2020. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not committed any breach of condition under the provisions of the Gujarat Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. It is further submitted that the vehicles in question is the only source of livelihood of the petitioner and that if the vehicles are kept in continuous seizure, then its condition shall deteriorate as the trial shall take its own time to conclude. It is, therefore, prayed that the Court below has seriously erred in not releasing the vehicles in question in favour of the petitioner.
(2.)By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the order dtd. 12/10/2020 passed by the 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godhra, Panchmahals below Muddamal Application, as also to quash and set aside the order dated 01.12.2 02 0 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Panchmahals at Godhra, in Criminal Revision Application No.49 of 2 02 0 and to order release of the muddamal vehicles in favour of the petitioner.
(3.)Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the FIR against the petitioner is registered under Ss. 379, 114 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and under Rule 3, 21 and 22(a) of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transport and Storage) Rules, 2 017 and under Ss. 4(1)A, 21(1), 21(4) and 21(4A) of the Mines and Mineral (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the competent authority is authorized to compound the offence under the Mines and Mineral (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957.
3.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the vehicles were seized on 10/1/2020. She submitted that the petitioner and the other co-accused have preferred quashing petition by filing Special Criminal Application Nos.6890 of 2020, 6955 of 2020, 6887 of 2020, 6935 of 2020, 6997 of 2020, 6927 of 2020 and 6956 of 2020. Learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has not committed any breach of condition under the provisions of the Gujarat Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. It is further submitted that the vehicles in question is the only source of livelihood of the petitioner and that if the vehicles are kept in continuous seizure, then its condition shall deteriorate as the trial shall take its own time to conclude. It is, therefore, prayed that the Court below has seriously erred in not releasing the vehicles in question in favour of the petitioner.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.