Gujarat High Court
Devabhai Ranchhodbhai Ahir vs State Of Gujarat on 20 July, 2020
Author: A. P. Thaker
Bench: A. P. Thaker
R/SCR.A/2853/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2853 of 2020
==========================================================
DEVABHAI RANCHHODBHAI AHIR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JAY N SHAH(10668) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS.NAMRATA J SHAH(6534) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER
Date : 20/07/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. By this petition under Article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside order dated 1.1.2019 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Songadh, in Criminal Misc. Application No.81 of 2018 and prayed to delete and modify the ondition of furnishing unconditional bank guarantee to the tune of 1.5 times the value of the Truck in the order dated 16.3.2020 passed by learned (Ad hoc) Additional District Judge, Tapi at Vyara in Criminal Revision Application No.29 of 2019. It is also prayed to release the truck bearing registration No.GJ21 T7236 forthwith.
2. By the impugned order, the vehicle in question was ordered to be released on condition of furnishing unconditional bank guarantee to the tune of 1.5 times the value of the muddamal seized vehicle along with bail bond of the same amount to the satisfaction of the court below.
Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 20 20:59:24 IST 2020R/SCR.A/2853/2020 ORDER
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Songadh by order dated 01.01.2019 rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for returning the muddamal vehicle. The petitioner therefore preferred Criminal Revision Application No.29 of 2019 in which the impugned order is passed.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the transporter and he is carrying on the business of transport. On 21.08.2018 the vehicle in question was detained by the police on allegation that it was involved in illegal mining and transportation of minor mineral sand and the complaint was filed under Section 379, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 read with Section 21(2) of the Gujarat Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017.
5. Learned advocate Mr.Jay Shah for the petitioner submitted that in similar matter being Special Criminal Application No.6957 of 2019, this Court has modified the condition imposed by the court below. It was, therefore, submitted that the petitioner is also ready to compound the offence by depositing fine amount as may be specified by the respondents.
6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Ms.Maithili Mehta Shah submitted that as the vehicle is under seizure and in custody of the Court, the offence cannot be compounded by the authority.
Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 20 20:59:24 IST 2020R/SCR.A/2853/2020 ORDER
7. Having heard the learned advocates for both the sides and on considering the fact that the petitioner is ready to compound the offence by depositing the fine amount, the petitioner is permitted to deposit an amount of Rs.50,000 instead of furnishing the Bank Guarantee to the tune of 1.5 times of the value of the vehicle.
8. The petition is, therefore, disposed of by modifying the condition of deposit of Rs. 50,000 instead of furnishing unconditional bank guarantee to the tune of 1.5 times of the value of the vehicle in question and rest of the conditions imposed by the court below shall continue to operate. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(A. P. THAKER, J) RS MALEK/ALOK KUMAR Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 20 20:59:24 IST 2020