Satheesh S. v. District Collector and Others; Sobhanan v. District Collector and Others (WP(C).No.9290/2020 & 9292/2020)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020** ## **PETITIONER:** **SATHEESH S., AGED 30 YEARS THIRUVATHIRA KEEZHAYIKONAM, VENJARAMOODU P.O., NELLANAD, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** **BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SASITH** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, 2ND FLOOR CIVIL STATION BUILDING, CIVIL STATION ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN- 695 043. 2 THASILDAR, MINI CIVIL STATION, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695 306. 3 DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), MINI CIVIL STATION, CHIRAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695 306. 4 DISTRICXT GEOLOGIST, VIVEKANAND NAGAR, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695004. 5 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA, PIN - 695 101.** **SRI.JESTIN MATHEW, GOVT.PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020 & WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** **2** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS** **MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** ## **PETITIONER:** **SOBHANAN AGED 55 YEARS KS LAND, MARKET ROAD ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.M.R.SASITH** ## **RESPONDENTS:** |**1**|**DISTRICT COLLECTOR**| |---|---| ||**IIND FLOOR CIVIL STATION BUILDING**| ||**CIVIL STATION ROAD**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM**| ||**KERALA**| |**2**|**THASILDAR**| ||**MINI CIVIL STATION**| ||**CHIRAYINKEEZHU**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM**| ||**KERALA PIN 695306**| |**3**|**DEPUTY THASILDAR (RR)**| ||**MINI CIVIL STATION**| ||**CHRIAYINKEEZHU**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695306**| |**4**|**DISTRICT GEOLOGIST**| ||**VIVEKANAND NAGAR**| ||**KESAVADASAPURAM**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM**| ||**KERALA, PIN-695004**| |**5**|**STAATION HOUSE OFFICER**| ||**ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM**| ||**KERALA, PIN-695101**| ## **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020 & WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** **3** **SRI.JESTIN MATHEW, GOVT.PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020 & WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** **4** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** # **=========================== WP(c) NO. 9290/2020 & 9292/2020** ## **==============================================** **Dated this the 23rd day of March 2020** ## **JUDGMENT** The prayer in WP(c) No. 9290/2020 is as follows: _(I) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3[rd] respondent to report seizure of MGV Tipper bearing No. KL24-C-3076 forthwith to concerned Magistrate having jurisdiction._ _(ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ, order to quash the Ext.P1 to extent to Ext.P1 order effecting the petitioner's vehicle bearing no. KL-24-C-3076 and release petitioner vehicle to him forthwith._ ## 2. The prayer in WP(c) No. 9292/2020 is as follows: _(I) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 3[rd] respondent to report seizure of MGV Tipper bearing No. KL-27-C-824 forthwith to concerned Magistrate having jurisdiction._ _(ii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any appropriate writ, order to quash the Ext.P1 to extent to Ext.P1 order effecting the petitioner's vehicle bearing no. KL-27-C-824 and release petitioner vehicle to him forthwith._ 3. The Full Bench of this Court the case in _**Prakash Nayak v.**_ ## _**District Collector [2016 (4) KLT 102 (FB)]**_ has held as follows in Para.27 thereof. _“The general powers of the police for arrest and seizure under the Code of Criminal Procedure are not specifically ousted or excluded by any of the provisions of_ ## **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020 & WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** ## **5** _the MMDR Act. On the other hand the offence punishable under Section 21 is made specifically cognizable also. That the offence is made cognizable means that any police officer, competent and empowered to act under the Code of Criminal Procedure, is competent to make arrest and to make seizure of properties, but prosecution can be launched only by the persons authorised by the Government under Section 22 of the MMDR Act. Contraband articles including minerals are liable to confiscation by court orders under sub-section (4A) of Section 21 of the MMDR Act. The latter part of the sub-section provides that the property shall be disposed of in accordance with the directions of such court. This means that appropriate orders including confiscation orders can be passed by the court having jurisdiction to take cognizance of an offence punishable under sub-section (1) of Section 21, on a complaint brought by any officer authorised under Section 22 of the MMDR Act. Appropriate orders meant under subSection (4A) will include even interim orders authorizing interim custody under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The object of sub-section (4A) of Section 21 is not that the property seized under sub-section (4) shall be liable to confiscation in all situations. What we find on an analysis of the various provisions is that confiscation of properties is authorised under sub-section (4A), by orders of the court having jurisdiction. However the court is competent to pass appropriate orders, for disposal of the properties. In appropriate cases where the facts and situations are of extreme violation confiscation will have to be ordered by the court. However, in the case of minerals illicitly transported or imported, confiscation must be the rule. But in the case of vehicles and other articles, appropriate orders including confiscation orders can be passed by the court having jurisdiction, and such properties can be appropriately dealt with.”_ 4. The 3[rd] respondent or the respondent officer concerned will ## **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020 & WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** **6** immediately ensure that the records and papers in relation to the matter in Ext.P2 Seizure Mahazar involved in these two cases will be immediately forwarded to the 4[th] respondent District Geologist without any further delay at any rate, within one week from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment. Thereafter, the 4[th] respondent District Geologist may file the requisite complaint before the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court concerned in relation to the alleged involvement of the petitioner's vehicle covered by Ext.P2 Seizure Mahazar for the alleged contravention of the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Kerala Mine and Minerals Conservation Rules, 2015 framed thereunder, without much delay, preferably within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of the case papers from the respondent Officer concerned as afore mentioned. 5. In that regard the 4[th] respondent will also immediately intimate the respective petitioners in these two cases about the filing of the said complaint before the Jurisdictional Magistrate's Court concerned and as to before which Magistrate's Court, the said complaint has been filed in these two cases. Thereupon, the petitioners may file the requisite application before the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court concerned seeking release of the vehicle and upon receipt of the said application, the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court concerned will consider the said plea for release of the **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020 & WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** **7** vehicle, taking a considered decision thereon and pass orders thereon, in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, through authorized counsel and after hearing the learned Government Pleader without much delay, preferably within a period of 2 weeks from the date of filing of such application. 6. If however, the competent 4[th] respondent District Geologist or the competent respondent Officer concerned does not file the complaint in the matter before the jurisdictional Magistrate's Court concerned, within the said period of 2 weeks, then the said officer shall ensure that the interim custody of the vehicle shall be given to the petitioner on execution of a simple bond. However this will be without prejudice to the right of the 4[th] respondent who subsequently could file any complaint, but in accordance with law. With these observations and directions, the above writ petitions will stand finally disposed of. ## **Sd/-** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS** ## **JUDGE** Nsd //true copy// PA to Judge **WP(C).No.9290 OF 2020 & WP(C).No.9292 OF 2020** **8** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF RC BOOK OF THE PETITIONER'S VEHICLE.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF SEIZURE MAHAZAR PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO 2ND RESPONDENT.**