Facts
The petitioner’s truck (Registration No. BR-06-GB-2739) was seized on June 23, 2023, in connection with Barhara P.S. Case No. 388/2023
Source reference: p. 1-2The case was registered under Sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code, along with Rules 56(i) and 56(ii) of the Bihar Minerals (Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2019 (as amended in 2021)
Source reference: p. 1-2The Department of Mines assessed a penalty of ₹3,06,200 as compounding fees and the cost of the sand
Source reference: p. 2The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a writ of Mandamus for the release of the vehicle and a stay on coercive proceedings, expressing a willingness to pay the penalty in installments
Source reference: p. 2-3Issues
1. Whether the court may direct the release of a vehicle seized for illegal mining activities upon the undertaking of the owner to pay the assessed penalty in installments
Source reference: p. 32. Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to compound the offense and withdraw the criminal case upon full payment of the penalty
Source reference: p. 3-4Law Applied
Bihar Minerals (Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2019, and the 2021 Amendment, specifically regarding the imposition of penalties/compounding fees for illegal transportation
Source reference: p. 2Writ jurisdiction to issue a Mandamus for the release of property and the compounding of offenses as provided under the relevant mining rules and the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the settlement of disputes
Source reference: p. 2-4Reasoning
The court balanced the state's interest in penalizing illegal mining with the petitioner’s right to seek the release of his property. The petitioner didn't contest the penalty but requested a payment plan
Source reference: p. 2-3Since the Department of Mines expressed no objection to installment payments—provided they were timely and the right to re-possess the vehicle in case of default was reserved—the court found it equitable to allow the release of the vehicle
Source reference: p. 3The court reasoned that once the total penalty (representing the fiscal loss to the state and the punitive element) is satisfied, the statutory objective is met, and the authorities should move toward compounding the offense as per the rules
Source reference: p. 4Holding
The court allowed the petition and directed Respondent No. 6 to release the truck upon payment of the first installment of ₹51,033 by August 5, 2026. The balance is to be paid in five equal monthly installments by the 5th of every month
The court held that if the petitioner defaults, the authorities have the liberty to re-possess the vehicle. Crucially, the court ordered that upon full payment of the ₹3,06,200, the respondent authorities must move for the compounding of the case
Source reference: p. 3-4Original Court PDF
Priya Ranjan KumarvsThe State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in