Ramesh, v. The Assistant Director Of
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.05.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.12670 of 2019 Ramesh ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukottai District.
3.The Sub Inspector of Police, K.Pudupatti Police Station, Pudukottai District.
.... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent to release the petitioner's Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-49-Q0609 seized by the third respondent on 21.05.2019 to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar For Respondents : Mr.S.Dhayalan Government Advocate ***
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2.By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3.The petitioner's vehicle was seized in connection with illegal transportation of sand. The enquiry in this regard is still pending. The learned counsel for the petitioner affirms before this Court that the petitioner's vehicle was not involved in any previous incident of sand theft or illegal transportation of sand. 4.The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record. If this submission turns out to be false, the order now passed by this Court would stand automatically recalled and the petitioner will be visited with serious consequences. I am of the view that no purpose will be served by keeping the vehicle in question in the custody of the respondents. If the vehicle is kept in open space and exposed to sun light and rain, it would lose its value. Therefore, the respondents are directed to release the said vehicle subject to the following conditions:- a) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) to the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust. He shall execute an affidavit of undertaking that he shall not involve in any offense in future that may lead to the seizure of the vehicle in question. The petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle in question till the proceedings are completed.
b) The petitioner shall produce all the documents pertaining to the ownership of the seized vehicle. But then, the petitioner states that he is the owner of the vehicle in question but his name is not figuring in the R.C.Book. He is having the original R.C.Book. The petitioner is permitted to produce the original R.C.Book at the time of seeking the release of the vehicle in question. c) This order for release of the vehicle can be pressed into service by the petitioner only if the vehicle is not in the custody of the criminal Court. If the vehicle is in the custody of concerned Criminal Court of appropriate jurisdiction, then, option is given to the petitioner to approach the concerned Judicial Magistrate to get release of the vehicle, by filing necessary application in the manner known to law.
d) As and when the respondents call for the vehicle for enquiry, the petitioner has to produce the vehicle in question and he shall cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.
5.Upon completion of these formalities, the respondents shall release the vehicle forthwith without any delay. If this undertaking given by the petitioner is breached, the petitioner will not be entitled to interim release of the vehicle in future. 6.The Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl Side)/ Vacation Officer // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) To 1.The Assistant Director of Geology and Mining, Pudukottai District, Pudukottai.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aranthangi, Pudukottai District.
3.The Sub Inspector of Police, K.Pudupatti Police Station, Pudukottai District.
+1cc to Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Advocate, SR.No. 66534 W.P.(MD)No.12670 of 2019 29.05.2019 (2/2) cmr KK/SAR/10.06.2019/3P-5C