Gujarat High Court
Bhupatbhai Ramjibhai Lathiya vs State Of Gujarat on 6 June, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 GUJ 21
Author: Biren Vaishnav
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/7960/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7960 of 2018
==========================================================
BHUPATBHAI RAMJIBHAI LATHIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. KRUTI M SHAH(2428) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
MR. VENUGOPAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99)
for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N)(11) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2,3,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 06/06/2018
ORAL ORDER
1 With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for final disposal today. 2 Rule. Dr.Venugopal Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.
3 This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the purpose of seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue Page 1 of 6 C/SCA/7960/2018 ORDER appropriate writ, order or direction to strike down the action of the respondent no.5 in booking the case under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act against the petitioner on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.
(b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside the action of the respondent no.5 in asking the petitioner to pay the penalty under the provisions of Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining Storage and Transportation) Rules, 2017.
(c) Pending admission, final hearing and disposal of this petition, direct the respondent no.5 not to insist for return of the custody of the vehicle in question i.e. Truck No. GJ21V7577, which is already released by him.
(d) Grant such other and further relief as thought fit in the interest of justice."
4 It is the case of the petitioner in the present petition that the vehicle in question being a truck No. GJ21V7577, was intercepted and seized by the respondent no.5, i.e. the Police Inspector, Karjan Police Station, under the provisions of Section 130(1)(3), 177, 204 and 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act. MS.Kruti Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that, though, the No Objection Certificate is issued by the Regional Transport Officer, the vehicle is not released. It is the case of the petitioner that the vehicle is not involved in Page 2 of 6 C/SCA/7960/2018 ORDER any illegal activity. There are specific instructions issued by the higher police authority that the Police Department has no power, authority or jurisdiction to prevent the vehicle and seize the same under Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Despite the same, in exercise of powers under the said section, the vehicle in question is seized. Further, the contention is raised that apart from the fact respondent no.5 being a police authority, has no authority to seize the vehicle and cannot even ask for N.O.C of the Geology and Mining Department because the same is beyond the powers of the authority.
5 Ms. Kruti Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the directions given in the order dated 10.05.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No. 4386 of 2018 and requested the Court to issue similar directions.
6 Dr. Venugopal Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader, has submitted that he has no objection if the direction similar to the one issued Page 3 of 6 C/SCA/7960/2018 ORDER in Special Civil Application No. 4386 of 2018 are issued. Dr.Patel, learned AGP, further submits that the issue of applicability of Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act be kept open, and without entering into the merits of the case, the Court may issue directions for release of the vehicle on the same terms and conditions as passed in the order dated 10.05.2018 in Special Civil Application No. 4386 of 2018.
7 In view of the aforesaid consensus, the following directions are issued"
(1) The petitioner shall execute proper amount of bond which the concerned authority requires as per the Rules, within a period of one week from today. (2) The petitioner shall not use the vehicle in question in any illegal activity or activity of commission of crime, in future.
(3) The petitioner shall carry out all their business of transport strictly in accordance with law with the parameters of the Gujarat Mineral Page 4 of 6 C/SCA/7960/2018 ORDER (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2005, amended from time to time and also in accordance with the Gujarat Minor Mineral Concession Rules,2010.
(4) The petitioner shall not sale, transfer or alienate the vehicles in any manner, pending the confiscation proceedings and shall produce the vehicles before the authorized officer, as and when call upon to produce the same for the purpose of further proceedings in the matter.
(5) The petitioner is also directed to file an undertaking on oath to abide by the above terms before the authorized officer and upon such completion of formality by the petitioner, the authorized officer shall immediately release the vehicle and handover the same to the petitioner. (6) This order is passed upon specific representation of learned advocate for the petitioner that in identical situation the coordinate Bench has consider the case on similar line. However, if any Page 5 of 6 C/SCA/7960/2018 ORDER deviation is found, it would be open for learned AGP, Dr. Venugopal Patel, to move the Court.
8 It is clarified that the order has been passed on consensus of parties and is restricted only to the question of release of the vehicle and the applicability of Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988, is kept open. With these observations, the petition stands allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted today.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) Bimal Page 6 of 6