Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Julfi Singh S/O Shri Jawahar Singh B/C ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 23 October, 2020
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 397/2020
Julfi Singh S/o Shri Jawahar Singh , Aged About 45 Years, R/o
Village Tighra, Ps Sadar, District Dholpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
----Respondent
AND Other connected cases as per Schedule-A appended to this order This Order shall govern all the cases the particulars of which have been given in Schedule-A appended to this order.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Sharma, Mr. Rajesh Gadwal, Mr. Anupam Sharma, Mr. Sanjay Khan, Mr. R.R. Goyal, Mr. Nitin Kumar Sharma, Mr. Tapeshwar Pal Singh Parmar, Mr. D.D. Khandelwal, Mr. Arvind Sharma, Mr. Umesh Dixit, Mr. Praveen Kumar Jain, Mr. Mohar Pal Meena, Mr. Amit Ratnawat, Mr. Bharat Yadav, Mr. Brahm Singh Gurjar, Mr. Brijesh Kumar Bhardwaj, Mr. Ashindra Gautam, Mr. Dushyant Jain, Mr. Sumit Khandelwal, Mr. Nitin Jain, Mr. Sandeep Jain, Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chobisa, Ms. Vandana Sharma, Mr. Narayan Singh Chaudhary, Mr. Syed Shahid Hasan, Mr. Shivraj Chauhan, Mr. Atual Kumar Jain, Mr. Mohammed Anees, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Sahu, Mr. Vikash Kumar Jakhar, Mr. Sandeep Pathak, Mr. Abhijeet Panchariya, Mr. Hanish Khan, Mr. M.S. Choudhary, Mr. Poonam Chand Sharma, Mr. Shyam Bihari Gautam, Mr. Nawal Singh Sikarwar, Mr. Vijayant Nirwan, Mr. Girish Khandelwal, Mr. D.S. Dhariwal, Mr. Dushyant Singh Naruka, Mr. S.S. (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (2 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Solanki, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Mr. Sumit Khandelwal, Mr. Teeka Ram Meena, Mr. Bheem Sain Bairwa, Mr. Raj Kumar Kasana, Mr. Harish Chandra Sharma, Ms. Sarika Choudhary, Mr. Rahul Agarwal, Mr. Girraj Prasad Gadhwal, Mr. Rohit Khandelwal, Mr. Raj Kumar Sharma, Mr. Manu Agarwal, Mr. Mohd. Shakir Khan, Mr. Umesh Vyas, Mr. Vivek Choudhary, Mr. Karanpal Singh, Mr. Avadesh Kumar Purohit, Mr. R.R. Goyal, Mr. Koslesh Kumar Bairwa, Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Barala, Mr. Rajendra Prasad Sharma, Mr. Tarun Jain, Mr. Rajneesh Gupta, Mr. Deepak Khandelwal, Mr. Amit Jindal, Mr. Vikas Kabra, Mr. Moti Lal Sharma, Mr. Laxmi Kant Malpura, Mr. S.N. Kumawat, Mr. Amit Dadhich, Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Pandey, Mr. Narendra Singh Shekhawat, Mr. Shivraj Chauhan, Mr. Satish Kumar Khandelwal, Mr. M.F. Baig, Mr. Ajit Singh Devanda, Mr. Dharmendra Gurjar, Mr. Devanshu Sharma, Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Palia, Mr. Sandeep jain, Mr. Raj Kumar Sharma, Mr. Arpit Srivastava, Mr. R.D. Meena, Mr. K.A. Khan, Mr. Aditya Mishra, Ms. Sunita Vashistha, Mr. Shri Ram Dhaka Mr. Chaman Singh, Mr. Ashok Yadav, Mr. Vishnu Shankar Badaya, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Meena, Mr. Sanjay Khedar, Mr. Rajendra Prasad Yadav, Mr. Ravindra Kumar Paliwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Choudhary, PP Mr. Anuj Goyal, Mining Engineer (Writ), Jaipur HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 23/10/2020 REPORTABLE
1. All these petitions relate to the prayer for release of tractors and trolleys, which have been seized by the Police (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (3 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Authorities/Mining Authorities/Forest Officials for various reasons including carrying "bazri", by way of illegal mining in Rajasthan and selling out the same etc.
2. All these petitions have been filed against the order passed by the concerned Magistrate whereby application under Section 451 & 457 Cr.P.C for releasing of tractor and trolley was rejected and therefore, the same are being heard together.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners have relied upon the judgment passed by this court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 2723/2019 (Asharam & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & connected misc. petitions) decided by common order dated 3.2.2020.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the order passed subsequently by this court in S. B. Criminal Misc.
(Petition) NO.2687/2020 (Nandlal Vs. State of Rajasthan) decided on 1.10.2020 to submit that vehicle should be released.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners also rely upon the judgment passed in the case of Nathulal Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2755/2020) decided on 1.10.2020, which also took into consideration the interim order passed in PIL "Khem Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan", (D.B.Civil Writ Petition NO.4239/2019) as (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (4 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] well as judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. Vs. State of Gujrat: (2002) 10 SCC 283.
6. The Mining Officer of the rank of Mining Engineer (Writ), Jaipur, who is present in court, opposed these petitions and submitted that decision has been taken by Mining Department to challenge the order passed in Asharam (supra) before the Supreme Court by filing of SLP. It is also stated that the Mining Department on the basis of judgment passed by Coordinate Bench in the case of Ganga Ram Vs. State (S.B. Criminal Misc.(Petition) No.1363/2020) at Principal Seat, Jodhpur decided on 2.9.2020 has received opinion from the Additional Government Counsel at Jodhpur to cite the said judgment before the concerned lower Court for denial of release of the vehicle.
7. I have considered the submissions and have gone through the judgments which have been cited at bar.
8. At the outset, this court finds that in Ganga Ram Vs. State (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1363/2020), decided by Principal Seat of this Court at Jodhpur on 2.9.2020, the judgment of Asharam (supra) was not cited and was not considered. The judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors.
(supra) was also not considered and the judgments passed in Harun Versus State of Rajasthan (D.B. Criminal Misc.
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)(5 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Petition No.76/2014), decided on 23rd July, 2015 and Laxman Versus State of Rajasthan (D.B. Criminal Misc.
Petition No.60/2018) were also not brought to the notice of the Court.
9. This court further finds that the interim order passed in the case of Khem Singh (supra) and the order passed by NGT have been considered in Gangaram (supra) and directions have been issued that the petitioners therein would be required to deposit the amount determined by Mining Engineer and after the said amount being determined, the vehicle has been directed to be released.
10. In Asharam's case judgment (authored by me), I had an occasion to examine the dispute and consider the law laid down by the Supreme Court with regard to release of vehicle under Sections 451 & 457 Cr.P.C. The provisions of Motor Vehicle Act with regard to permits as well as the conditions for carriage permit were also examined.
11. This court also examined the power of suspension of permits. That apart, the judgment passed in Harun (supra) was considered by this court which took into consideration the offence committed by the vehicle relating to the Rajasthan Forest Act. In another case of Laxman (supra), the Division Bench considered the aspect regarding confiscation by the Mining Department where the reference was made to the Division Bench as to in what circumstances the vehicle should not (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (6 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] be released and it was held that where the confiscation proceedings have already been conducted, the power would not lie with the Magistrate to release the vehicle. The court thereafter passed direction for releasing of the tractor with trolley laying down certain conditions.
12. The Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 laid down the provisions relating to offenses, penalties and prosecution under Chapter 10. Rule 54(5) & (6) of the Rules, deserve to be quoted, which read as under:
"54. Illegal mining, transportation and storage of minerals:-
(1) ....
(2) ....
(3) ......
(4) .....
(5) Whenever any person, without a lawful authority, raises any mineral from any land other than under any mineral concession or any other permission and for that purpose bring on the land any tool, equipment, vehicle or other thing, such tool, equipment, vehicle etc. mineral, if any, may be seized by the authorities mentioned in sub-rule (4) who shall give a receipt to the person from whose possession the property or mineral is seized:
Provided that every officer seizing any property or mineral under this rule may handover the property or mineral so seized to the nearest police station or police chauki.
Provided further that the seized vehicle, equipment or mineral may be released after deposition of cost of mineral along with the compound fees as specified in sub-rule (3). Provided also that where mineral so raised has already been dispatched or consumed, the authorities mentioned in sub- rule (3) shall recover cost of mineral along with the compound fees as specified in sub-rule (3).
Provided also that where vehicle, equipment or mineral so seized is not released, the officer seizing the property or (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (7 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] mineral shall make a report of such seizure within seventy two hours to his superior officer and to the Magistrate having jurisdiction.
(6) All property seized under this rule shall be liable to be confiscated by an order of Magistrate if the amount equal to ten times of royalty in lieu of cost of mineral, rent, royalty, compensation for environmental degradation and tax chargeable on the land occupied without lawful authority, etc. is not paid by the trespasser within a period of three months from the date of commission of such offence or when the recoveries are not affected by that time:
Provided that on payment of these dues within the said period of three months, all properties seized shall be ordered to be released and shall be handed over to the trespasser or the owner of the property."
13. On the basis of aforesaid provisions, the Officer i.e. the Mining Engineer (Writ) submits that the power lies with the Mining Engineer to seize the vehicle.
14. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has specifically submitted that in none of the case, the Mining Department has passed order either under Rule 54(5) or under Rule 54(6) of the Rules, 2017 that is to say that neither any penalty has been imposed nor the confiscation proceedings have been undertaken.
15. The Mining Engineer (Writ), who is present in person in court, does not dispute with regard to the said fact of the vehicle having not been confiscation as yet.
16. In the case of Nathulal (supra), this court had occasion to again examine this aspect and in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. (supra), this court while relying upon the judgment in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. (supra) directed for release of the vehicle.
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)(8 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
17. This court also notices that different view had been taken by the Coordinate Bench in Naval Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.2670/2020), decided on 3.9.2020, which did not notice the law laid down by this court in Asharam (supra) as well as by the Supreme Court supra and therefore, judgment in Naval Singh (supra) was treated as per-incuriam in Nathulal Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra).
18. This court finds that the observations made in Khem Singh (supra) were of interregnum in nature and the law laid down by Supreme Court earlier was not brought to its notice. The provisions for compounding is also after confiscation. In none of the cases herein, the provisions under Rule 54 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2017 have been pressed by the Mining Department. Till date, neither penalty has been imposed nor confiscation has been done.
19. The Supreme Court in the case of Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai & Ors. (supra) has examined the law laid down and the conditions with regard to release of different goods/vehicle in different circumstances as under:-
"8. The question of proper custody of the seized article is raised in number of matters. In Basavva Kom Dyamangouda Patil v. State of Mysore: (1977) 4 SCC 358 this Court dealt with a case where the seized articles were not available for being returned to the complainant. In that case, the recovered ornaments were kept in a trunk in the police station and later it was found missing, the question was with regard to payment of those articles. In that context, the Court observed as under:-
"4. The object and scheme of the various (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (9 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] provisions of the Code appear to be that where the property which has been the subject-matter of an offence is seized by the police, it ought not to be retained in the custody of the Court or of the police for any time longer than what is absolutely necessary. As the seizure of the property by the police amounts to a clear entrustment of the property to a Government servant, the idea is that the property should be restored to the original owner after the necessity to retain its ceases. It is manifest that there may be two stages when the property may be returned to the owner. In the first place it may be returned during any inquire or trial. This may particularly be necessary where the property concerned is subject to speedy or natural decay. There may be other compelling reasons also which may justify the disposal of the property to the owner or otherwise in the interest of justice. The High Court and the Sessions Judge proceeded on the footing that one of the essential requirements of the Code is that the articles concerned must be produced before the Court or should be in its custody. The object of the Code seems to be that any property which is in the control of the Court either directly or indirectly should be disposed of by the Court and a just and proper order should be passed by the Court regarding its disposal. In a criminal case, the police always acts under the direct control of the Court and has to take orders from it at every stage of an inquiry or trial. In this broad sense, therefore, the Court exercises an overall control on the actions of the police officers in every case where it has taken cognizance."
9. The Court further observed that where the property is stolen, lost or destroyed and there is no prima facie defence made out that the State or its officers had taken due care and caution to protect the property, the Magistrate may, in an appropriate case, where the ends of justice so require, order payment of the value of the property.
10. To avoid a situation, in our view, powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. should be exercised promptly and at the earliest.
17. In our view, whatever be the situation, it is 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 (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (10 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] 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.
21. However, these powers are to be exercised by the concerned Magistrate. We hope and trust that the concerned Magistrate would take immediate action for seeing that powers under Section 451 Cr.P.C. are properly and promptly exercised and articles are not kept for a long time at the police station, in any case, for not more than fifteen days to one month. This object can also be achieved if there is proper supervision by the Registry of the concerned High Court in seeing that the rules framed by the High Court with regard to such articles are implemented properly.
20. In Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. Vs. Jindal Exports Ltd.:
(2001) 6 SCC 356, the Supreme Court has held as under:-
"19. In Mamleshwar Prasad and Another vs. Kanhaiya Lal reflecting on the principle of judgment per incuriam, in paras 7 & 8, this Court had stated thus:-
"7. Certainty of the law, consistency of rulings and comity of courts - all flowering from the same principle - converge to the conclusion that a decision once rendered must later bind like cases. We do not intend to detract from the rule that, in exceptional instances, where by obvious inadvertence or oversight a judgment fails to notice a plain statutory provision or obligatory authority running counter to the reasoning and result reached, it may not have the sway of binding precedents. It should be a glaring case, an obtrusive omission. No such situation presents itself here and we do not embark on the principle of judgment per incuriam.
8. Finally it remains to be noticed that a prior decision of this Court on identical facts and law binds the Court on the same points in a later case. Here we have a decision admittedly rendered on facts and law, indistinguishably identical, and that ruling must bind.
20.This Court in A.R.Antulay vs. R.S. Nayak & Another (1998 (2) SCC 602), in para 42 has quoted the observations of Lord Goddard in Moore vs. (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (11 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Hewwit (1947) 2 All.ER 270 and Penny vs. Nicholas (1950) 2 All.ER 89 to the following effect:-
"Per incuriam are those decisions given in ignorance or forgetfulness of some inconsistent statutory provision or of some authority binding on the court concerned, so that in such cases some part of the decision or some step in the reasoning on which it is based, is found, on that account to be demonstrably wrong..."
21.This Court in State of U.P. & Another vs. Synthetics & Chemicals Ltd. & Another MANU/SC/0616/1991:1993(41)ECC326 : 1993 (41) ECC3 26 in para 40 has observed thus :-
"40. 'Incuria' literally means 'carelessness'. In practice per incuriam appears to mean per ignoratium. English courts have developed this principle in relaxation of the rule of stare decisis. The 'quotable in law' is avoided and ignored if it is rendered, 'in ignoratium of a statute or other binding authority'. (Young v. Bristol aeroplane co. Ltd)..."
22. The two judgments (1) Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corporation Ltd., Chandigarh vs. President Officer, Labour Court, Chandigarh and Others MANU/SC/0479/1990 :
(1990)IILLJ70SC : (1990)IILLJ70SC and (2) State of U.P. and Another vs. Synthetics and chemicals Ltd.
and Another MANU/SC/0616/1991 :
1993(41)ECC326 : 1993(41)ECC326 were cited in support of the argument. Attention was drawn to paras 40, 41 and 43 in the first judgment and paras 39 and 40 in the second judgment. In these two judgments no view contrary to the views expressed in the aforesaid judgments touching the principle of judgment per incuriam is taken.
23. A prior decision of this court on identical facts and law binds the Court on the same points of law in a latter case. This is not an exceptional case by inadvertence or oversight of any judgment or statutory provisions running counter to the reason and result reached. Unless it is a glaring case of obtrusive omission, it is not desirable to depend on the principle of judgment 'per incuriam'. It is also not shown that some part of the decision based on a (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (12 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] reasoning which was demonstrably wrong, hence the principle of per incuriam cannot be applied."
21. In Jai Singh & Ors. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi:
(2010) 9 SCC 385, the Supreme Court has held as under:-
"37. It must be remembered that in these proceedings, the pleas raised by the DTC and MCD before the ARC as well as the ARCT were identical. The order passed by the ARCT has been upheld by a coordinate bench of the High Court. The RCSA No: 17/2001 filed by MCD on identical grounds was thus dismissed by a subsequent coordinate bench. That was indeed in conformity with the high traditions, procedures and practices established by the courts to maintain judicial discipline and decorum. The underlying principle being, to avoid conflicting views taken by coordinate benches of the same court. Except in compelling circumstances, such as where the order of the earlier bench can be said to be per incuriam , in that it is passed in ignorance of an earlier binding precedent/statutory or constitutional provision, the subsequent bench would follow the earlier coordinate bench."
22. According to Blacks' Law Dictionary (Edition) per-incuriam means through inadvertence. The doctrine of per-incuriam is that a decision is to be treated as given per-incuriam when it is given in ignorance of the terms of statute or of a rule having statutory force or a binding precedent.
23. Lord Goddard, in Huddersfield Police Authority Vs. Watson:
27 (1947) 2 All ER 193 observed "where a case or statute has not been brought to the Court's attention and the Court gave the decision in ignorance or forgetfulness of the existence of the case or statute, it would be a decision rendered in per-incuriam".
24. In the opinion of this court, the view taken by the Supreme Court requires to be considered and followed and any judgment, which did not notice the law laid down by the Supreme Court or (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (13 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] the provisions of law, has to be treated as per-incuriam. The provision of Section 451 & 457 Cr.P.C. are unambiguous and clear and it would be useful to quote them as under:-
451. Order for custody and disposal of property pending trial in certain cases.
When any property is produced before any Criminal Court during any inquiry or trial, the Court may make such order as it thinks fit for the proper custody of such property pending the conclusion of the inquiry or trial, and, if the property is subject to speedy and natural decay, or if it is otherwise expedient so to do, the Court may, after recording such evidence as it thinks necessary, order it to be sold or otherwise disposed of. Explanation.- For the purposes of this section," property"
includes-
(a) property of any kind or document which is produced before the Court or which is in its custody,
(b) any property regarding which an offence appears to have been committed or which appears to have been used for the commission of any offence.
457. Procedure by police upon seizure of property.
(1) Whenever the seizure of property by any police officer is reported to a Magistrate under the provisions of this Code, and such property is not produced before a Criminal Court during an inquiry or trial, the Magistrate may make such order as he thinks fit respecting the disposal of such property or the delivery of such property to the person entitled to the possession thereof, or if such person cannot be ascertained, respecting the custody and production of such property.
(2) If the person so entitled is known, the Magistrate may order the property to be delivered to him on such conditions (if any) as the Magistrate thinks fit and if such person is unknown, the Magistrate may detain it and shall, in such case, issue a proclamation specifying the articles of which such property consists, and requiring any person who may have a claim thereto, to appear before him and establish his claim within six months from the date of such proclamation.
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)(14 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
25. Unless the respondents namely; Mining Authorities or the State have confiscated the goods/vehicle etc. till that stage, the vehicle can be released by the concerned Magistrate laying down the conditions under Sections 457 Cr.P.C. The prime reason is that goods or vehicle, which have been seized should not go waste or rusted. Of course, the condition of bond can always be imposed as one of the conditions as directed by this court in the case of Asharam (supra) for the purpose.
26. Keeping in view the law as noticed above and in view of the fact that there is no confiscation having done for illegal mining as on the date and the imposition of fine or penalty would be on the person (owner) and not on the vehicle, this court is inclined to follow its earlier view taken in Asharam's case, which reads as under:-
"11. In the aforesaid background, this Court finds that while it is true that a vehicle should not be allowed to get rusted in Police Station and the same ought to be released for its better maintenance and proper use. Several suggestions were given out by the Officers of the Transport Department as well as by the Mining Department for laying down the conditions before release of the seized tractors, trolleys and vehicles being used for illegal mining activities.
12. In Harun Versus State of Rajasthan: D.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.76/2014 decided on 23.7.2015 along with connected matters by the Division Bench of this Court wherein it has been held that if a vehicle is found to be involved in committing violation of the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 and carrying forest produce, the same cannot be released during the pendency of trial on supurdgi to the registered owner of the vehicle, if proceedings of confiscation have already been initiated. Relying upon the law laid down in Harun (supra), a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Shoukat Khan Versus State of Rajasthan: S.B. (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (15 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Criminal Misc. (Petition) No.6307/2016, decided on 22.2.2017 has held that supurdginama can be given, if proceedings for confiscation have been initiated. In Laxman Versus State of Rajasthan: D.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.60/2018 decided on 6.4.2018 along with connected matters by the Division Bench where a reference was made to the Division Bench on account of different opinion relating to the power of release of vehicles wherein the Division Bench has held as under:
"Most of the judgments cited by learned counsel appearing from the side of the petitioners have ruled in favour of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to release the vehicles under the provisions of Section 451 and/or 457 of the Cr.P.C. A discordant note has however been sounded by Single Bench judgment in Ramswaroop's case, which was later followed in Mala Ram's, supra. These judgments, in view of the analysis of law which we have made herein-above, do not lay down correct law. In fact, the same Single Judge, who delivered the judgment in Ramswaroop's case on 28.08.2015, in his earlier judgment dated 26.10.2012 in Muknaram Vs. State of Rajasthan - S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.3285/2012, had held that in a case in which offence has already been compounded by the competent authority and an amount has been imposed as compounding fees and the same has not been paid or deposited by the person concerned, for the purpose of recovery or realization of the same, a condition can be imposed by the Court while ordering release of the vehicle to pay or deposit the same and the Court can refuse to release the seized vehicle even temporarily under Section 457 Cr.P.C., if such deposit is not made. In view of the above discussion, the referred questions are answered in the terms that once the Officer of the Mining Department, who seized the vehicle, has reported such seizure to his Superior Officer and to the Magistrate having jurisdiction, he shall cease to have the power to release the vehicle, and in that event, the Magistrate having jurisdiction would be empowered to release such vehicle, with or without the condition of deposit of compounding fee."
In view thereof, the power is vested with the concerned Magistrate for release of seized vehicle.
13. Keeping in view the above, as this Court notices that in none of the cases, the Mining Department has (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (16 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] not initiated the confiscation proceedings, it was submitted that compounding fee must be charged from the petitioners before release of the vehicle. However, this Court is of the view that the compounding fee can only be charged, if it is adjudicated that the concerned vehicle was involved in the illegal activities, which can only be when trial is completed. A presumption in this regard cannot be taken at the present stage.
14. In view thereof, the impugned orders passed by the Courts below dated 30.3.2019, 21.10.2019, 3.10.2019, 10.10.2019, 8.11.2019, 25.4.2019 and 8.4.2019 in each of the case shall stand set aside and this Court directs as under:
a) The concerned Police Station shall release the tractor and trolley to the person, who is the registered owner of the vehicle alone.
b) The release of the tractor and trolley shall be subject to the condition that the concerned owner shall get both the tractor and the trolley registered with the transport authorities and also obtain due permit within a period of one month from the date of release and deposit the copy with the concerned Police Station.
c) A personal security of an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-
to the satisfaction of the concerned Court to which the concerned Police Station is attached, shall be submitted for the purpose of release of the vehicle.
d) The petitioners shall keep the vehicle so released intact and shall not change its identification. The petitioners shall produce the vehicle as and when trial Court requires the same for proposed identification of the case property.
e) The petitioners shall furnish the photographs of the vehicle showing its number and colour etc.
f). At the time of release, the petitioners shall also give an undertaking to the effect that vehicle shall not be used for any illegal purpose and if so found, the concerned owner shall be personally liable."
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)(17 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
27. It is noticed that the on coming "Rabi" crop season is approaching and the farmers would require their tractors and trolleys for the said purpose, therefore taking into consideration the above, keeping the vehicles at Police Station would render them go waste.
28. Accordingly, these petitions are allowed and tractor and trolley as mentioned in these petitions as per Schedule-A annexed to this order shall be released as per aforesaid conditions laid down herein-above in Para 14(a) to (f) of Asharam's case (supra).
29. All pending applications also stand disposed off.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J
Anu /397
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(18 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
SCHEDULE-A
S.No. Item No Case Number and name Vehicle Type Vehicle in cause of parties. Registration No. list dt.
23.10.20
1 166 SBCRLMP No.397/20 Tractor with RJ-11-RA-9397
Julfi Singh Vs. State trolley
2 169 CRLMP No.1231/20 Tractor with RJ-33-RA-2540
Bhojraj Vs. State trolley
3 170 CRLMP No.2022/20 Tractor & RJ-34-RB-2164
Babulal Meena Vs. State trolley RJ-34-EV-0684
4 172 CRLMP No.2059/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-3354
Khemraj Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-1108
5 173 CRLMP No.2062/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-4289
Om Prakash Vs. State trolley
6 175 CRLMP No.2076/20 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6333
Rameshwar Vs. State trolley
7 176 CRLMP No.2077/20 RJ-06-RB-5558
Rameshwar Vs. State Tractor with
trolley
8 177 CRLMP No.2111/20 Tractor with RJ-29-RA-2850
Sumer Singh Gurjar Vs. trolley
State
9 178 CRLMP No.2112/20 RJ-29-RA-5116
Sardar Singh Gurjar Vs. Tractor with State trolley 10 179 CRLMP No.2179/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-2982 Veerbhan Vs. State trolley 11 180 CRLMP No.2186/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-0727 Suneel Kumar Vs. State trolley 12 181 CRLMP No.2232/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-8191 Rajesh Kumar Vs. State Trolley 13 182 CRLMP No.2230/20 Tractor RJ-26-RA-9159 Sanjay Vs. State Trolley 14 183 CRLMP No.2231/20 Tractor RJ-47-RA-0793 Gorulal Vs. State Trolley 15 184 CRLMP No.2274/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-1954 Premram Vs. State Trolley 16 186 CRLMP No.2362/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-3108 Meenakshi Kumari Vs. Trolley RJ-34-EV-0360 State 17 187 CRLMP No.2404/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-5319 Hukam Singh Mali Vs. Trolley State 18 188 CRLMP No.2441 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8694 Dinesh Kumar Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-2215 19 189 CRLMP No.2452/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-3968 Irshad Ahmed Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0164 (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (19 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] 20 190 CRLMP No.2476/20 Tractor RJ-26-RA-7708 Parmeshwar Vs. State Trolley 21 191 CRLMP No.2492/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-2676 Jatan Singh Vs. State Trolley RJ-34-EV-0678 22 192 CRLMP No.2519/20 Tractor RJ-29-RA-9754 Prahalad Meena Vs. Trolley RJ-02-EV-0275 State 23 193 CRLMP No.2530/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7652 Tikaram Vs. State trolley 24 194 CRLMP No.2540/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-3720 Ikram Ahamad Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0724 25 195 CRLMP No.2554/20 Tractor UP-83-AC-3961 Harendra Vs. State Trolley 26 196 CRLMP No.2562/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8861 Rajesh Vs. State Trolley 27 198 CRLMP No.2578/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8924 Harikesh Meena Vs. Trolley State 28 199 CRLMP No.2601/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8360 Khilari Vs. State Trolley 29 200 CRLMP No.2603/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-5745 Arjun Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-26-EV-0449 30 202 CRLMP No.2613/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-6660 Onkar Prasad Vs. State Trolley 31 203 CRLMP No.2621/20 Tractor RJ-47-RA-2901 Lokesh Vs. State Trolley 32 205 SBCMP No.2630/20 Tractor with RJ 26-RB 7374 Banti Vs. State trolley 33 206 SBCMP No.2631/20 Tractor with RJ 26-RB 7087 Sitaram Vs. State trolley 34 207 SBCMP No.2636/20 Tractor with RJ 26-RB-1827 Ramswaroop @ trolley Swaroop Vs. State Tractor with RJ-08-RA-5358 trolley 35 208 SBCMP No.2658/20 Tractor RJ 25-RB-3710 Rajveer Vs. State Trolley RJ 25-EV-0217 36 209 SBCMP No.2664/20 Tractor RJ 14-RC-2888 Jagdeesh Vs. State Trolley RJ 14-EV-0227 37 210 SBCMP No.2668/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-5293 Dharmraj Meena Vs. trolley State 38 211 SBCMP No.2673/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-3194 Madhu Devi Vs. State trolley 39 214 SBCMP No.2699/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-8350 Dev Lal Vs. State trolley 40 215 SBCMP No.2704/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-0743 Sankar Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-14-EV-0071 41 216 SBCMP No.2706/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-6620 Bharat Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-14-EV-0232 42 217 SBCMP No.2707/20 Tractor RJ-06-RB-7280 (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (20 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Tayyub Vs. State trolley 43 218 SBCMP No.2722/20 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8286 Shaitan Singh Vs. State trolley 44 219 SBCMP No.2741/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-3257 Bodulal Vs. State trolley 45 220 SBCMP No.2754/20 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7645 Dinesh Kumar Sharma Trolley Vs. State Tractor with RJ-14-RC-9044 trolley 46 221 SBCMP No.2756/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-5399 Sukhpal Vs. State 47 223 SBCMP No.2774/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8985 Shankar Lal Vs. State trolley 48 226 SBCMP No.2796/20 Tractor with RJ-47-RA-2615 Giriraj Vs. State trolley 49 227 SBCMP No.2795/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-4775 Ram Prasad Vs. State trolley 50 228 SBCMP No.2797/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-3301 Madan Lal Vs. State trolley 51 229 SBCMP No.2803/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-8475 Hem raj Vs. State Tractor RJ-26-RB-5786 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6337 52 230 CRLMP No.2841/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-6460 Ganesh Narayan Meena Trolley Vs. State 53 231 CRLMP No.2857/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6344 Kamlesh Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-1503 54 232 CRLMP No.2866/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8892 Ajay Kumar Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0078 55 233 CRLMP No.2882/20 Tractor ENG- Madan Lal Vs. State Trolley RHH2KF1087 Chachis No.WZTA81419 107145 56 234 CRLMP No.2883/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-5366 Kishan Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0801 57 235 CRLMP No.2898/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-8615 Bharatraj Vs. State Trolley 58 236 CRLMP No.2899/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6892 Devhans Vs. State Trolley 59 237 CRLMP No.2909/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-3409 Kailash Prajapat Vs. Trolley RJ-25-EV-0271 State 60 238 CRLMP No.2913/20 Tractor RJ-20-RA-7225 Shankar Lal Vs. State Trolley 61 239 CRLMP No.2918/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-6123 Prem Singh Vs. State Trolley 62 241 CRLMP No.2930/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-7242 Kallo Devi Vs. State Trolley 63 242 CRLMP No.2931/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-0893 (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (21 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Batti Lal Meena Vs. Trolley RJ-25-EV-0020 State 64 243 CRLMP No.2932/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-0637 Ram Prasad Meena Vs. Trolley State 65 244 CRLMP No.2933/20 Tractor RJ-25-RA-7922 Dinesh Kumar Vs. State Trolley 66 245 CRLMP No.2946/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-6899 Shakti Singh Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0094 67 246 CRLMP No.2951/20 Trolley RJ-25-EV-2150 Raghuveer Gurjar Vs. State 68 247 CRLMP No.2952/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-8695 Chetan Kumar Vs. State 69 248 CRLMP No.2957/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-0459 Suresh Kumar Vs. State Trolley 70 249 CRLMP No.2962/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-3899 Dinesh Vs. State 71 250 CRLMP No.2964/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-1987 Rajendra Vs. State Trolley 72 251 CRLMP No.2965/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RC-3682 Suresh Vs. State Trolley 73 252 CRLMP No.2966/20 Tractor with RJ-09-RB-3850 Lalaram Vs. State Trolley 74 253 CRLMP No.2967/20 Tractor with RJ-26-RA-7738 Mahaveer Vs. State Trolley 75 254 CRLMP No.2968/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RC-9205 Prakash Vs. State Trolley 76 255 CRLMP No.2973/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6990 Shivraj Vs. State Trolley 77 256 CRLMP No.2974/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-1844 Ramhans Kanwar Vs. trolley State Tractor with RJ-02-RB-9489 trolley 78 257 CRLMP No.2988/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-3616 Giriraj @ Keltaram Vs. Trolley State 79 258 CRLMP No.3002/20 Tractor RJ-34-RA-8688 Sitabai Vs. State Trolley 80 259 CRLMP No.3003/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-0008 Kuldeep Vs. State Trolley 81 260 CRLMP No.3006/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-5558 Shrawanlal Vs. State Trolley 82 261 CRLMP No.3007/20 RJ-26-RA-6786 Nathulal Vs. State Tractor Trolley 83 262 CRLMP No.3010/20 Tractor E-NYDH00800 Panna Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0815 84 263 CRLMP No.3011/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-1069 Harikesh Meena Vs. Trolley State (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (22 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] 85 264 CRLMP No.3012/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-6520 Jitendra Kumar Vs. Trolley State 86 265 CRLMP No.3013/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-3280 Dayaram Vs. State Trolley 87 266 CRLMP No.3014/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-6751 Kishan Lal Vs. State Trolley 88 267 CRLMP No.3019/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-6325 Amritlal Vs. State Trolley 89 268 CRLMP No.3021/20 Tractor RJ-25-RA-6142 Mukesh Meena Vs. State Trolley 90 269 CRLMP No.3026/20 Tractor RJ-23-RB-9593 Dharamraj Vs. State Trolley 91 270 CRLMP No.3027/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-3237 Prahlad Vs. State Trolley 92 271 CRLMP No.3028/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-1381 Rambharos Meena Vs. Trolley State 93 272 CRLMP No.3029/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-4383 Govardhan Vs. State Trolley 94 273 CRLMP No.3030/20 Tractor RJ-25-RA-7133 Hanuman Meena Vs. Trolley State 95 274 CRLMP No.3067/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-7329 Shivjiram Vs. State Trolley 96 275 CRLMP No.3068/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-0969 Devendra Kumar Vs. Trolley RJ-14-EV-0308 State 97 276 CRLMP No.3069/20 Tractor RJ-14-RC-7178 Purshootam Lal Vs. Trolley RJ-14-EV-0288 State 98 278 CRLMP No.3093/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-2474 Hargyan Vs. State Trolley 99 279 CRLMP No.3094/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8363 Jainarayan Vs. State Trolley 100 282 CRLMP No.3107/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-5373 Firoj Khan Vs. State Trolley 101 283 CRLMP No.3108/20 Tractor with Chasis Fhul Mohammad Vs. Trolley No.HNY4200174 State 7EP 102 284 CRLMP No.3116/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-6655 Mohammad Akaram Vs. Trolley State 103 285 CRLMP No.3117/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-6214 Afajal Beg Vs. State Trolley 104 286 CRLMP No.3118/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8051 Amritlal Vs. State Trolley 105 288 CRLMP No.3130/20 Tractor with Chasis Antaram Vs. State Trolley No.MBNGAJDUL RM00177 106 289 CRLMP No.3131/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-9563 (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (23 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] Shakil Beg Vs. State Trolley 107 290 CRLMP No.3136/20 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6679 Jasram Vs. State Trolley 108 291 CRLMP No.3137/20 Tractor with RJ-02-RD-5385 Heera Lal Nayak Vs. Trolley State 109 292 CRLMP No.3183/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-5272 Hemraj Vs. State Trolley 110 293 CRLMP No.3184/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8223 Rattiram Vs. State Trolley 111 294 CRLMP No.3196/20 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8979 Hansraj Vs. State Trolley 112 296 CRLMP No.3216/20 Tractor with Chasis Jitendra Vs. State Trolley No.MEA8D061E L1266994 113 297 CRLMP No.3217/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-2068 Mukesh Vs. State Trolley 114 298 CRLMP No.3218/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-3643 Premsankar Saini Vs. Trolley State 115 299 CRLMP No.3222/20 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-2295 Heera Lal Vs. State Trolley 116 300 CRLMP No.3229/20 Tractor with RJ-29-RB-3624 Rambabu Vs. State Trolley 117 301 CRLMP No.3230/20 Tractor with Chasis Bharatlal Vs. State Trolley No.MEA8DO61E L2292606 118 302 CRLMP No.3234/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-1973 Jagdeesh Vs. State Trolley RJ-14-EV-0039 119 303 CRLMP No.3241/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-3651 Jaisingh Vs. State Trolley RJ-14-EV-0050 120 304 CRLMP No.3242/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-1047 Hemraj Vs. State Trolley RJ-34-EV-0064 121 305 CRLMP No.3256/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-0794 Shivraj Meena Vs. State Trolley RJ-34-EV-0630 122 306 CRLMP No.3271/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-1686 Kamlesh Vs. State trolley 123 307 CRLMP No.3274/2020 Tractor with RJ-29-RB-4560 Ramswaroop Meena Vs. trolley State 124 308 CRLMP No.3286/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7913 Sanwarmal Vs. State trolley 125 309 CRLMP No.3288/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-5100 Gangadhar Vs. State trolley 126 310 CRLMP No.3289/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7324 Devkishan Vs. State trolley 127 311 CRLMP No.3293/2020 Tractor with RJ-29-RB-2594 Jaisingh Vs. State trolley 128 312 CRLMP No.3299/2020 Tractor RJ-34-RB-2165 Vikram Singh Vs. State Trolley RJ-34-EV-0268 (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (24 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] 129 313 CRLMP No.3300/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-4915 Surendra Meena Vs. trolley State 130 314 CRLMP No.3303/2020 Tractor RJ-08-RA-5359 Ravindra Singh Vs. Trolley RJ-25-EV-0037 State 131 315 CRLMP No.2214/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-4652 Surgyan Vs. State trolley 132 316 CRLMP No.3330/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7330 Shivlal Vs. State trolley 133 317 CRLMP No.3350/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-5684 Bharat Lal Vs. State trolley 134 318 CRLMP No.3349/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8017 Ramshaya Vs. State trolley 135 319 CRLMP No.3352/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-1448 Gajanand Meena Vs. trolley State 136 320 CRLMP No.3353/20 Tractor with RJ-15-RA-9986 Ramraj Keer & Ors. Vs. trolley State Tractor with RJ-26-RB-1887 trolley Tractor with RJ-26-RA-9032 trolley 137 321 CRLMP No.3354/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-2390 Kishansahay Meena Vs. trolley State 138 322 CRLMP No.3374/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-6002 Manoj Kumar Vs. State trolley 139 323 CRLMP No.4756/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-6002 Manoj Kumar Meena Vs. trolley State 140 324 CRLMP No.3379/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RC-5638 Laxman Lal Vs. State trolley 141 325 CRLMP No.3406/2020 Tractor RJ-14-RC-5686 Raju Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-14-EV-0032 142 326 CRLMP No.3408/2020 Tractor RJ-19-RE-0738 Ram Prasad Vs. State Trolley RJ-26-EV-0631 143 327 CRLMP No.3416/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-1770 Dharmendra Kumar Vs. trolley State 144 329 CRLMP No.3459/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7273 Irfan Vs. State trolley 145 330 CRLMP No.3463/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7982 Gyrashi Lal Vs. State trolley 146 331 CRLMP No.3465/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-3421 Gabru Vs. State trolley 147 332 CRLMP No.3466/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-3719 Mahendra Vs. State trolley 148 333 CRLMP No.3467/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7595 Tejmal Vs. State trolley 149 334 CRLMP No.3475/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RC-6772 Gaindilal Vs. State trolley (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (25 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] 150 335 CRLMP No.3482/2020 Tractor with CHASIS NO.
Mukesh Kumar Vs. State trolley MEA8D061KK12
53191
151 337 CRLMP No.3499/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7843
Vinod Vs. State trolley
152 338 CRLMP No.3504/2020 Tractor with RJ-02-RD-9280
Sandeep Kumar Vs. trolley
State
153 339 CRLMP No.3510/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8785
Mangi Vs. State trolley
154 340 CRLMP No.3511/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RA-9436
Roop Singh Vs. State trolley
155 343 CRLMP No.3636/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-5033
Dharmendra Vs. State trolley
156 344 CRLMP No.3640/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-0733
Giriraj Prasad Vs. State trolley
157 345 CRLMP No.3675/2020 Tractor RJ-05-RC-3985
Raju Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-05-EV-0055
158 346 CRLMP No.3697/2020 Demo RJ-20-TC-412
Swastik Krishi Kendra Tractor
Vs. State
159 347 CRLMP No.3700/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-9980
Ashok Vs. State trolley
160 348 CRLMP No.3716/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-4840
Deepak Vs. State trolley
161 349 CRLMP No.3767/2020 Tractor with RJ-29-RB-3090
Badri Prasad Vs. State trolley
162 351 CRLMP No.3791/2020 Tractor RJ-14-RC-8341
Prahlad Vs. State Trolley RJ-14-EB-0417
163 352 CRLMP No.3810/2020 Tractor with ENGINE NO.
Ram Prasad Vs. State trolley ZKG2KAA6753
CHASIS NO.
MBNAAAJXAKZG07
780
164 353 CRLMP No.3811/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-5288
Lalaram Vs. State trolley
165 354 CRLMP No.3812/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7999
Devlal Vs. State trolley
166 355 CRLMP No.4268/2020 Tractor with RJ-12-RA-7258
Chhajuram Vs. State trolley
167 356 CRLMP No.3813/20 UNREGISTERED
Shankar Lal Meena Vs. Trolley
State
168 358 CRLMP No.3830/2020 Tractor with RJ-21-RF-5466
Bannu Pathan Vs. State trolley
169 359 CRLMP No.3839/2020 Tractor with RJ-29-RA-7247
Kajodmal Vs. State trolley
170 360 CRLMP No.3844/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-0880
Roshan Nath Vs. State trolley
171 361 CRLMP No.3845/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7459
Deshraj Vs. State trolley
172 362 CRLMP No.3846/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6288
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(26 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
Lalidevi Vs. State trolley
173 363 CRLMP No.3847/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6137
Kishanlal Vs. State trolley
174 364 CRLMP No.3848/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6229
Ramdeva Vs. State trolley
175 365 CRLMP No.3849/2020 Tractor with ENGINE NO.
Kaluram Vs. State trolley NKF2KLJ0618
CHASIS NO.
MBNAAAJGLKJE075
42
176 367 CRLMP No.3880/2020 Tractor with RJ-21-RD-0196
Mohammad Saleem Vs. trolley
State
177 373 CRLMP No.3939/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-9267
Vikas Vs. State trolley
178 374 CRLMP No.3942/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RA-9806
Brijmohan Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-1754
179 375 CRLMP No.3944/2020 Tractor RJ-26-RB-5492
Hanuman Prasad Vs. trolley
State
180 376 CRLMP No.3945/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-4656
Lekhraj Mali Vs. State trolley
181 377 CRLMP No.3947/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-4781
Banwari Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-2312
182 378 CRLMP No.3949/20 Trolley Unregistered
Jagram Vs. State
183 379 CRLMP No.3950/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-6577
Zahir Khan Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0156
184 380 CRLMP No.3951/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-3703
Vinod kumar Vs. State trolley
185 381 CRLMP No.3952/20 Trolley RJ-25-EV-1444
Devraj Vs. State
186 382 CRLMP No.3953/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-2213
Jagdeesh Vs. State trolley
187 383 CRLMP No.3966/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-3384
Jaisingh Vs. State trolley
188 384 CRLMP No.3968/20 Tractor RJ-37-RA-6967
Sitaram Vs. State trolley
189 385 CRLMP No.3972/20 Tractor RJ-17-RB-7865
Kailash Chandra Vs. trolley
State
190 386 CRLMP No.3973/20 Tractor RJ-26-RA-7687
Mukesh Vs. State trolley
191 388 CRLMP No.3976/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-1962
Narsi Gurjar Vs. State trolley
192 389 CRLMP No.3980/20 Tractor RJ-26-RA-4513
Namonarayan Vs. State trolley
193 390 CRLMP No.3994/20 Tractor RJ-01-RB-2873
Balbeer Singh Vs. State trolley
194 391 CRLMP No.4004/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-3144
Prakash Vs. State Trolley RJ-29-EV-0230
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(27 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
195 392 CRLMP No.4009/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-5789
Ramroop Vs. State trolley
196 393 CRLMP No.4010/20 Tractor RJ-34-RA-6454
Niranjan Lal Vs. State trolley
197 394 CRLMP No.4012/20 Tractor RJ-34-RA-8884
Asrar Vs. State trolley
198 395 CRLMP No.4014/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-0055
Asrar Vs. State trolley
199 396 CRLMP No.4018/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-0994
Ravi Kumar Vs. State trolley
200 397 CRLMP No.4019/20 Tractor RJ-21-RF-3626
Mohammad Talim Vs. Trolley RJ-25-EV-1892
State
201 399 CRLMP No.4023/20 Tractor RJ-02-RC-1435
Kalamuddin Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0200
202 400 CRLMP No.4024/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8553
Ramraj Vs. State trolley
203 401 CRLMP No.4026/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8299
Shivjiram Vs. State trolley
204 402 CRLMP No.4027/20 Tractor RJ-08-RB-5805
Dhanraj Vs. State trolley
205 403 CRLMP No.4029/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8624
Lacchi Vs. State trolley
206 404 CRLMP No.4031/20 Tractor ENG. NO-
Lekhraj Singh Vs. State trolley NKF2KLJ0802
CHA.NO.-
MBNAAAJGLKJF
07747
207 407 CRLMP No.4053/20 Tractor RJ-27-RB-2553
Laxman Gurjar Vs. trolley
State
208 408 CRLMP No.4059/20 Tractor ENG. NO-
Lalaram @ Lal Chand trolley NKM2ELE0044
Vs. State CHA.NO-
MBNAAAEALKJA
04383
209 409 CRLMP No.4060/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-1374
Shivraj Vs. State trolley
210 410 CRLMP No.4101/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-8115
Shankar Singh Vs. State trolley
211 411 CRLMP No.4103/20 Tractor RJ-15-RA-5961
Soraj Vs. State trolley
212 412 CRLMP No.4106/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-0922
Niranjanlal Vs. State trolley
213 413 CRLMP No.4109/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-3076
Man Singh Vs. State trolley
214 414 CRLMP No.4110/20 Tractor RJ-14-RB-5707
Ramjilal Vs. State trolley
215 415 CRLMP No.4112/20 Tractor RJ-17-RB-4924
Suraj Singh Vs. State trolley
216 416 CRLMP No.4127/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6721
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(28 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
Buddhiprakash Pahadiy trolley
217 417 CRLMP No.4131/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6610
Ramesh Vs. State trolley
218 419 CRLMP No.4144/20 Tractor RJ-29-RA-6002
Adisaal Meena Vs. State trolley
219 420 CRLMP No.4149/20 Tractor RJ-11-GB-0959
Habib Khan Vs. State trolley
220 421 CRLMP No.4151/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-7146
Brahmanand Vs. State trolley
221 422 CRLMP No.4179/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-9498
Shankarlal Vs. State trolley
222 423 CRLMP No.4180/20 Tractor RJ-51-RA-5543
Bhim Singh Vs. State trolley
223 425 CRLMP No.4208/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-2379
Hanuman Vs.State trolley
224 426 CRLMP No.4207/20 RJ-26-RA-7409
Hansraj Vs. State Tractor
225 427 CRLMP No.4209/20 trolley RJ-26-R-6742
Ram Singh Vs. State
Tractor
trolley
226 428 CRLMP No.4210/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-0500
Mohammed Ahsan Vs. trolley
State
227 429 CRLMP No.4229/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-5861
Hanuman Vs. State trolley
228 430 CRLMP No.3706/20 RJ-14-RD-5637
Mukesh Vs. State Tractor
229 431 CRLMP No.3707/20 trolley RJ-25-RA-7498
Mahendra Vs. State
Tractor
trolley
230 432 CRLMP No.4230/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-8502
Dashrath Vs. State trolley
231 433 CRLMP No.4231/20 RJ-26-RB-6317
Sukhpal Vs. State Tractor
232 434 CRLMP No.4232/20 trolley RJ-26-RB-6595
Kana Ram Vs. State
233 435 CRLMP No.4233/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-2373
Ram Niwas Vs. State trolley
Tractor
trolley
234 437 CRLMP No.4240/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-0799
Babulal Meena Vs. State trolley
235 438 CRLMP No.4241/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-3219
Chotu Ram Gurjar Vs. trolley
State
236 439 CRLMP No.4281/20 Tractor RJ-17-RB-6576
Bajrang Lal Vs. State trolley
237 440 CRLMP No.4283/20 Tractor RJ-17-RB-4271
Bajrang Lal Vs. State trolley
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(29 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
238 441 CRLMP No.4300/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-4242
Badri Narayan Vs. State trolley
239 442 CRLMP No.4304/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8290
Akbar Khan Vs. State trolley
240 443 CRLMP No.4306/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-7659
Dinesh Kumar Vs. State trolley
241 445 CRLMP No.4322/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-5115
Kedar Vs. State trolley
242 446 CRLMP No.4324/20 Tractor CHA.NO.-
Ramji Lal Vs. State trolley MBNAAAJGLKJG
08103
243 447 CRLMP No.4332/20 Tractor RJ-26-RA-8384
Rajesh Kumar Vs. State trolley
244 448 CRLMP No.4336/20 Tractor RJ-14-RC-4980
Pappu Lal Vs. State trolley
245 449 CRLMP No.4361/20 Tractor RJ-03-RA-9787
Khem Raj Vs. State trolley
246 451 CRLMP No.4364/20 Tractor RJ-09-RC-3504
Kana Mali Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-2093
247 452 CRLMP No.4368/20 Tractor with RJ-26-RA-8596
Ghasi Lal Jat Vs. State trolley
Tractor with RJ-26-RA-8597
trolley
248 453 CRLMP No.4379/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-3360
Heera Lal Vs. State trolley
249 454 CRLMP No.4380/20 Tractor RJ-14-RD-2295
Heera Lal Vs. State trolley
250 457 CRLMP No.4399/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-4791
Mukesh Kumar Vs. State trolley
251 459 CRLMP No.4401/20 Tractor RJ-17-RC-3158
Ishwar Singh Vs. State trolley
252 460 CRLMP No.4412/20 Tractor RJ-27-RA-9825
Lalaram Gurjar Vs. trolley
State
253 462 CRLMP No.4418/20 Tractor RJ-34-RA-5891
Mahesh Meena Vs. State trolley
254 463 CRLMP No.4423/23 Tractor RJ-03-RA-8425
Harful Vs. State trolley
255 464 CRLMP No.5071/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-6743
Ritesh Kumar Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0649
256 466 CRLMP No.4443/20 Tractor CHA.NO.MBNAA
Giriraj Prasad Vs. State trolley AJGLKJF07549
257 467 CRLMP No.4461/20 Tractor CHA.NO.MBNAJ
Meghraj Vs. State trolley 48AFLTG40388
258 468 CRLMP No.4501/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-3986
Jagdish Vs. State trolley
259 469 CRLMP No.4533/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-4697
Mahendra Kumar Vs. trolley
State
260 470 CRLMP No.4534/20 Tractor CHA.NO.-
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(30 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
Kailash Chand Vs. State Trolley AZJSH9192175
3
RJ-25-EV-1694
261 471 CRLMP No.4579/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-5208
Indraj Vs. State trolley
262 472 CRLMP No.4580/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-5317
Guman Singh Vs. State Trolley RJ-29-EV-0579
263 473 CRLMP No.4581/20 Tractor RJ-34--RA-6602
Rajesh Vs. State Trolley RJ-29-EV-0827
264 474 CRLMP No.4606/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-6207
Suresh Kumar Vs. State Trolley
Tractor with RJ-01-RA-8562
Trolley
265 475 CRLMP No.4609/20 Tractor RJ-26-RA-6513
Ramphool Mali Vs. State trolley
266 477 CRLMP No.4624/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Dinesh Kumar Vs. State
267 478 CRLMP No.4625/20 Trolley RJ-17-EA-1789
Mukesh Nagar Vs. State
268 479 CRLMP No.4626/20 Tractor RJ-17-RC-0100
Labhu Bai Vs. State trolley
269 480 CRLMP No.4627/20 Tractor RJ-17-RB-6145
Laxman Singh Vs. State trolley
270 481 CRLMP No.4628/20 Tractor RJ-34-RB-2588
Rajesh Meena Vs. State Trolley RJ-34-EV-0609
271 482 CRLMP No.4629/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Prem Raj Vs. State
272 483 CRLMP No.4630/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Khem Raj Vs. State
273 484 CRLMP No.4632/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Banti lal Vs. State
274 485 CRLMP No.4633/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Mohan Singh Vs. State
275 488 CRLMP No.4637/20 Tractor RJ-17-RB-8803
Gordhan Singh Vs. State trolley
276 489 CRLMP No.4639/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Jai Singh Vs. State
277 490 CRLMP No.4640/20 Tractor CHA.NO.-
Dharmendra Vs. State trolley MBNGAAJXNLJB
00169
278 492 CRLMP No.4647/20 Tractor RJ-14-RB-7810
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. State trolley
279 493 CRLMP No.4648/20 Tractor RJ-47-RA-0683
Jahid Khan Vs. State trolley
280 494 CRLMP No.4653/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-8378
Hanuman Vs. State trolley
281 495 CRLMP No.4657/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Heera Lal Vs. State
282 498 CRLMP No.4674/20 Tractor MP-14-AC-5238
Shiv Singh Vs. State trolley
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(31 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
283 499 CRLMP No.4676/20 Tractor RJ-17-R-5758
Karu Lal Vs. State trolley
284 500 CRLMP No.4677/20 Tractor RJ-17-RC-0263
Prabhat Singh Vs. State trolley
285 501 CRLMP No.4682/20 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Meharban Singh Vs.
State
286 502 CRLMP No.4684/20 Tractor RJ-17-RA-1999
Rafiq Khan Vs. State trolley
287 503 CRLMP No.4685/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6091
Deepu Vs. State trolley
288 505 CRLMP No.4687/20 Tractor RJ-17-RB-5163
Rajendra Singh Vs. trolley
State
289 506 CRLMP No.4695/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-3557
Ishwar Singh Vs. State trolley
290 507 CRLMP No.4696/20 Tractor UP-80-EM-3493
Dharamveer Singh Vs. trolley
State
291 508 CRLMP No.4706/20 Tractor RJ-25-RB-7280
Ramraj Vs. State trolley
292 509 CRLMP No.4721/20 Tractor RJ-11-RB-0241
Sonveer Vs.State trolley
293 510 CRLMP No.4720/20 Tractor UP-80-EU-0492
Naresh Vs. State trolley
294 511 CRLMP No.4722/20 Tractor RJ-11-RA-9356
Ravindra Vs. State trolley
295 514 CRLMP No.4739/2020 Tractor with UP85/BK0983
Mahaveer Vs. State trolley
296 515 CRLMP No.4740/2020 Tractor with CHASIS NO.
Brij Mohan Vs. State trolley MBNAAAJGLKJG
-08004
CHASIS NO.
MBNAAAJGLKJK
-04647
297 516 CRLMP No.4753/2020 Tractor with RJ-29-RB-1951
Kajod Mal Vs. State trolley
298 518 CRLMP No.4784/20 Tractor with RJ-20-RA-5899
Vikram Yadav Vs. State trolley
299 520 CRLMP No.4788/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-0426
Hansraj Vs. State trolley
300 521 CRLMP No.4794/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RB-4915
Parasram Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-2132
301 522 CRLMP No.4795/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RA-5016
Shoji Vs. State trolley
302 523 CRLMP No.4703/2020 Tractor with RJ-07-RC-8553
Ramavatar Meena Vs. trolley
State
303 524 CRLMP No.4796/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7648
Vikramsingh Vs. State trolley
304 525 CRLMP No.4807/2020 Tractor with RJ-37-RA-8413
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(32 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
Hanuman Singh Vs. trolley
State
305 526 CRLMP No.4808/2020 Tractor with RJ-08-RB-2967
Ram Raj Vs. State trolley
306 527 CRLMP No.4811/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-5256
Bhom Singh Vs. State trolley
307 528 CRLMP No.4812/2020 Tractor RJ-34-RA-8322
Jagmohan Vs. State Trolley RJ-34-EV-0672
308 530 CRLMP No.4821/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6144
Chhaju Lal Vs. State trolley
309 531 CRLMP No.4822/2020 Tractor RJ-29-RB-0827
Narayan Meena Vs. Trolley RJ-29-EV-0104
State
310 533 CRLMP No.4835/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RC-0113
Panchu Vs. State trolley
311 535 CRLMP No.4848/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8085
Kishanlal mali Vs. State trolley
312 537 CRLMP No.4894/2020 Tractor RJ-26-RB-9983
Arjun Lal Vs. State
313 538 CRLMP No.4895/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8791
Dharamraj Vs. State trolley
314 541 CRLMP No.4917/2020 Tractor with CHASIS NO.
Mukhtyar Vs. State trolley MBNGAAJXNLJD
00609
315 543 CRLMP No.4926/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-3870
Namonarayan Vs. State trolley
316 545 CRLMP No.4936/2020 Tractor with RJ-11-RA-9416
Bheemsain Vs. State trolley
317 546 CRLMP No.4939/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-5050
Khushiram Vs. State trolley
318 548 CRLMP No.4976/2020 Tractor MBNAK48ACKT
vishvendra Vs. State Chasis No. N27594
Trolley RJ-34-EV-0490
319 549 CRLMP No.4979/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RB-2658
Bharat Lal Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0108
320 550 CRLMP No.4980/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RB-2073
Kailash Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-1815
321 551 CRLMP No.4985/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8728
Anil Kumar Vs. State trolley
322 552 CRLMP No.4989/2020 Tractor with CHASIS NO.
Sanwalram Vs. State trolley MEA8D061EL12
66979
323 555 CRLMP No.4995/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RB-7971
Mahesh Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0723
324 558 CRLMP No.5017/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8572
Harimohan Vs. State trolley
325 559 CRLMP No.5018/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7320
Fateh Singh Vs. State trolley
326 560 CRLMP No.5019/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RA-4832
Jagdish Vs. State trolley
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(33 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
327 561 CRLMP No.5020/2020 Trolley Uregistered
Dayaram Vs. State
328 562 CRLMP No.5022/2020 Trolley RJ-25-EV-0754
Battilal Vs. State
329 563 CRLMP No.5023/2020 Tractor with RJ-29-RB-3499
Rajesh Kumar Vs. State trolley
330 564 CRLMP No.5025/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-5916
Ghanshyam Vs. State trolley
331 565 CRLMP No.5026/2020 Tractor with RJ-08-RA-7025
Shyojiram Vs. State trolley
332 566 CRLMP No.5027/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8964
Ajay Kumar Vs. State trolley
333 567 CRLMP No.5030/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RA-5382
Kanhaiyalal Vs. State trolley
334 568 CRLMP No.5031/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RA-8471
Panchu Gurjar Ram Vs. trolley
State
335 569 CRLMP No.5034/2020 Trolley RJ-25-EV-0669
Hansraj Vs. State
336 570 CRLMP No.5035/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-3416
Ramraj Meena Vs. State trolley
337 571 CRLMP No.5037/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7513
Buddhiprakash Vs. State trolley 338 572 CRLMP No.5038/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RC-2898 Rajendra Vs. State trolley 339 573 CRLMP No.5039/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-2738 Dharmraj Vs. State trolley 340 574 CRLMP No.5040/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8527 Ramkishan Vs. State trolley 341 575 CRLMP No.5042/2020 Tractor with RJ-02-RD-3658 Amar Singh Vs. State trolley 342 576 CRLMP No.5043/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RC-0213 Sonilal Gurjar Vs. State trolley 343 579 CRLMP No.5046/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RB-9414 Rajendra Meena Vs. trolley State 344 580 CRLMP No.5047/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8133 Ramkesh Meena Vs. trolley State 345 581 CRLMP No.5048/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-6448 Ramraj Vs. State trolley 346 582 CRLMP No.5049/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-7827 Dinesh kumar Vs. State trolley 347 583 CRLMP No.5050/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RA-2482 Siraj Khan Vs. State trolley 348 584 CRLMP No.5053/2020 Tractor with RJ-08-RB-9331 vinod kumar Vs. State trolley 349 585 CRLMP No.5054/2020 Pet.1 RJ-25-RB-8659 Sanjay Vs. State Tractor RJ-25-EV-0082 Pet.2 Trolley (Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM) (34 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020] 350 586 CRLMP No.5055/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8376 Banwari Lal Jat Vs. trolley State 351 587 CRLMP No.5056/2020 Tractor with RJ-08-RB-6064 Madanlal Choudhary Vs. trolley State 352 588 CRLMP No.5057/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RC-8380 Kalya Vs. State trolley 353 589 CRLMP No.5058/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-1899 Devnarayan Vs. State trolley 354 591 CRLMP No.5060/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RC-0089 Jogal Kishor Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-2242 355 592 CRLMP No.5061/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8563 Rameshchand Vs. State trolley 356 593 CRLMP No.5062/2020 Trolley RJ-29-EV-0524 Rajaram Vs. State 357 594 CRLMP No.5063/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-6341 Kamla Devi Vs. State trolley 358 595 CRLMP No.5064/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-1161 Shivraj Vs. State trolley 359 596 CRLMP No.5066/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8510 Mukesh Vs. State trolley 360 597 CRLMP No.5067/2020 Tractor with RJ-08-RB-2320 Ramavtar Vs. State trolley 361 598 CRLMP No.5068/2020 Tractor with CHASIS NO.
Harikesh Meena Vs. trolley MBNAAAJVALRM
State 00530
362 599 CRLMP No.5069/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RC-0271
Rajesh Vs. State trolley
363 600 CRLMP No.5072/2020 Trolley Unregistered
Ramswaroop Vs. State
364 601 CRLMP No.5076/2020 Tractor CHASIS NO.
Dinesh Kumar Vs. State MBNGAAEKPLJD
Trolley 00139
RJ-25-EV-0105
365 602 CRLMP No.5077/2020 Trolley Unregistered
Rameshwar Vs. State
366 603 CRLMP No.5078/2020 Trolley Unregistered
Rameshwar Vs. State
367 604 CRLMP No.5079/2020 Trolley Unregistered
Jairam Vs. State
368 605 CRLMP No.5080/2020 Trolley Unregistered
Paluram Vs. State
369 606 CRLMP No.5081/2020 Trolley Unregistered
Babulal Vs. State
370 607 CRLMP No.5082/2020 Tractor with RJ-29-RB-5917
Ram Lal Vs. State trolley
371 608 CRLMP No.5083/2020 Trolley Unregistered
Babulaal Vs. State
372 609 CRLMP No.5084/2020 Tractor with CHASIS NO.
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(35 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
Phoolsingh Vs. State trolley MBNAAAJBUJJC00
303
373 610 CRLMP No.5085/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6537
Madanlal Vs. State trolley
374 C1 CRLMP No.2175/2020 Tractor with RJ-02-RE-2931
Charat Singh vs. State trolley
375 C2 CRLMP No.2249/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RB-3469
Kamlesh Vs. State Trolley RJ-24-EV-2202
376 C3 CRLMP No.2331/2020 Tractor with RJ-34RB-2798
Ram Singh Vs. State trolley
377 C4 CRLMP No.2350/2020 Tractor RJ-34-RB-2885
Rameshi Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-1030
378 C5 CRLMP No.2359/2020 Tractor RJ-34-RB-3230
Bharat Lal Meena Vs. Trolley RJ-34-EV-0027
State
379 C6 CRLMP No.2526/2020 Tractor with RJ-11-RB-0651
Dharmendra Vs. State trolley
380 C10 CRLMP No.2639/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RB-6446
Sardar Vs. State Trolley RJ-25-EV-0939
381 C14 CRLMP No.2829/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-6314
Harpal Vs. State trolley
382 C15 CRLMP No.2845/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RA-3690
Devlal Vs. State trolley
383 C17 CRLMP No.2887/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-3299
Prakash Vs. State trolley
384 C18 CRLMP No.2888/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-2045
Sagir Vs. State trolley
385 C19 CRLMP No.2929/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8960
Suresh Singh Vs. State trolley
386 C20 CRLMP No.2940/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-0429
Amba Lal Vs. State trolley
387 C21 CRLMP No.2943/2020 Tractor with RJ-02-RE-5561
Ram Babu Yadav Vs. State trolley
388 C22 CRLMP No.2947/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-5732
Dev Kishan Vs. State trolley
389 C23 CRLMP No.2976/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8059
Ashok Vs. State trolley
390 C24 CRLMP No.2987/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-8668
Vishnu Kumar Vs. State trolley
391 C25 CRLMP No.3043/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RB-7937
Mangilal Vs. State trolley
392 C26 CRLMP No.3049/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-3848
Asharam Vs. State trolley
Tractor with RJ-26-RB-3753
trolley
393 C27 CRLMP No.3783/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-7084
Soraj Vs. State trolley RJ-14-RD-3588
Tractor with
trolley
394 C30 CRLMP No.3147/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-9287
Ramsingh Vs. State trolley
395 C31 CRLMP No.3238/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RB-3684
Hariram Vs. State trolley
396 C32 CRLMP No.3250/2020 Tractor with RJ-01-RA-5235
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
(36 of 36) [CRLMP-397/2020]
Bhanwar Lal Vs. State trolley
397 C33 CRLMP No.3295/2020 Tractor with RJ-44-RA-0744
Chand Mal Saini Vs. State trolley RJ-25-RA-7533
RJ-34-R-1406
RJ-26-RB-1960
RJ-26-RB-1141
398 C34 CRLMP No.3637/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-4502
Jagdish Vs. State trolley
399 C35 CRLMP No.4143/2020 Tractor with RJ-26-RA-3774
Motilal Vs. State trolley
400 C36 CRLMP No.4145/2020 Tractor with RJ-08-RB-2877
Kanahiya Lal Vs. State trolley
401 C37 CRLMP No.4192/2020 Trolley RJ-34-EV-0017
Kamlesh Vs. State
402 C38 CRLMP No.4193/2020 Tractor RJ-34-RF-6575
Lala Meena Vs. State
403 C39 CRLMP No.4196/2020 Tractor RJ-25-RB-7156
Balaji Construction Com.
Vs. State
404 C40 CRLMP No.4197/2020 Trolley RJ-34-EV-0182
Budhram Meena Vs. State
405 C42 CRLMP No.4258/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RC-4913
Rajaram Vs. State trolley
406 C44 CRLMP No.4393/20 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-8788
Jai Singh Vs. State trolley
407 C45 CRLMP No.4398/20 Tractor with RJ-29-RA-6705
Devendra Kumar Vs. State trolley
408 C46 CRLMP No.4437/2020 Tractor with RJ-08-RB-9128
Suresh Saini Vs. State trolley
409 C50 CRLMP No.4569/2020 Tractor with RJ-14-RD-4797
Mukesh Choudhary Vs. trolley
State Tractor with RJ-14-RD-3610
trolley
410 C51 CRLMP No.4743/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RB-1358
Gordhan Vs. State trolley
411 C52 CRLMP No.4746/2020 Tractor with RJ-25-RB-4395
Rishikesh Vs. State trolley
412 C55 CRLMP No.5111/2020 Trolley UNREGISTERED
Ghamandi Vs. State
413 C56 CRLMP No.5112/2020 Tractor with RJ-34-RA-8971
Kaduram Meena Vs. State Trolley
414 C8 CRLMP No.5052/20 Tractor RJ-26-RB-6997
Ratiram Vs. State
415 512 CRLMP No.4727/20 Tractor RJ-29-RB-4199
Sitaram Vs. State Trolley RJ-29-EV-0317
(Downloaded on 28/10/2020 at 08:44:59 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)