Patna High Court

Brij Kishor PrasadversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA, BIHAR

Decided: 20 February 2026
Disposal: PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
Bench: ARUN KUMAR JHA

Holding

The court held that the seizure was justified due to overloading, but directed a fresh re‑weighing by both volumetric and weighbridge methods and ordered release if within permissible limits, otherwise the penalty must be paid.

Summary

The petitioner, owner of a 12‑wheeler truck, sought the release of his vehicle seized by the Mines Inspector under the Bihar Minerals Rules, claiming he possessed a valid challan authorising transport of 22.70 metric tonnes of sand and that the loaded weight was within the permissible limit. The Department of Mines argued that the truck was overloaded by 49.75 cubic feet (approximately 2 MT) of sand, violating Rule 56(2) of the 2019 Rules, and that the penalty of Rs 2,65,596 was lawfully imposed. The court examined the conflicting weight calculations, the applicability of volumetric measurement versus weight, and the maintainability of the writ given that the penalty order is appealable under Rule 67(1). It held that the seizure was justified due to overloading but ordered a fresh re‑weighing of the vehicle both by weighbridge and volumetric methods. If the re‑weighing shows compliance, the truck shall be released immediately; otherwise, the penalty must be paid in instalments. The petition was therefore partly allowed.

Issues considered

Whether the seizure of the truck by the Mines Inspector was lawful under the Bihar Minerals (Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2021 and 2019.
Whether the penalty imposed under Rule 56(2) of the Rules, 2019 is valid.
Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite the penalty order being appealable under Rule 67(1).
Whether sand transportation should be measured by volume or weight for compliance with the challan.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to immediate release of the vehicle pending re‑weighing.

Subjects

vehicle seizure
illegal mining
overloading
mineral transport
mandamus
penalty
re‑weighing
constitutional rights
Articles 14
Articles 21

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1419 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Saran
======================================================
Brij Kishor Prasad, Son of Sohaban Ray, resident of Village- Jalalpur, PS-
Doriganj, Dist- Saran

... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar, through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna, Bihar
Bihar
2. The Additional Chief Secretary Cum Mines Commissioner, Patna, Bihar
Bihar
3. The Mines Development Officer, West Champaran , Motihari, Bihar Bihar
4. The District Magistrate Cum Collector, Saran, Bihar Bihar
5. The Mines Inspector, Motihari, Saran, Bihar Bihar
6. Station House Officer, PS- Sangrampur, Saran, Bihar Bihar

... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Chhaya Kirti, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, SC-12
For the Dept. of Mines : Mr. Utsav Anand, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
CAV JUDGMENT
Date : 20-02-2026

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition

seeking following reliefs :

“(i) For issuance of an appropriate writ(s),
order (s) or direction (s) in the nature of
mandamus or any other writ(s) order(s
direction(s) to the respondent authorities to
release the vehicle i.e. 12- wheeler Truck
bearing registration no. BR01GL9906 in
favour of the petitioner as seized by
respondent no.5-Mines Inspector, Motihari
vide memo of seizure dated 08.11.2023 and
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
2/10

further taken into the custody of SHO, P.S.-
Sangrampur i.e. respondent no.6 under
actions prescribed in Bihar Minerals
(Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining,
Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2021.
(ii) For issuance of appropriate writ(s),
order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of
mandamus or any other writ(s) order(s)
direction(s) to the respondent authorities to
cancel the letter dated 27.11.2023 whereby
which the respondent no. 3 has imposed
penalty in order to get the vehicle released.
(iii) For issuance of appropriate writ(s),
order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of
mandamus or any other writ(s) order(s)
direction(s) to the respondent authorities to
pay the damages or compensation for the
loss so suffered by the petitioner due to the
illegal actions of the respondents as it has
affected the business of the petitioner as well
as deteriorated the value of the vehicle.
(iv) For issuance of any other writ(s)
order(s) or direction(s) as the petitioner is
entitled to.

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present

writ petition are that the petitioner is stated to be the owner of a

12 wheeler Truck bearing registration no. BR-01GL-9906 with

Chassis No. MAT466388G3G55989 and Engine No.

61G68352458. The petitioner is engaged in transportation
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
3/10

business. The petitioner claims that he possessed a valid challan

dated 05.11.2023 issued by the Government of Bihar, explicitly

authorizing the transportation of yellow sand weighing 22.70

metric tonnes equivalent to 567.50 CFT in volume.

3. Further case of the petitioner is that during a routine

inspection, the truck of the petitioner was inspected by the

Mines Inspector, Motihari and further weighed as 34.695 MT in

gross which was found within the permissible limit for

transportation. However, the loaded vehicle was seized by the

Mines Inspector and later sent to the custody of SHO,

Sangrampur without any valid reason. The said vehicle has the

valid permit laden limit of 35,000 Kg (35MT) in total and the

vehicle with load was found well within the permissible weight

limit. Even then, the Mines Development Officer, vide letter

dated 27.11.2023, under Rule 56(4) of Bihar Minerals

(Concession, Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and

Storage) Amended Rules, 2021 (hereinafter to be referred as

'Rules, 2021'), directed the petitioner to pay penalty of Rs.

2,65,596/- within thirty days.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the concerned respondent has arbitrarily seized the vehicle of

the petitioner, who is the bonafide owner of the vehicle in
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
4/10

question and is engaged in the business of transportation. For

carrying sand on the said vehicle, the petitioner has got a valid

challan and the driver was carrying the same.

5. The learned counsel further submitted that at the

time of issuance of challan, the empty truck (unladen) was

weighed as 11.49 MT and after loading of yellow sand, it was

weighed as 34.19 MT in total, which was within the permissible

limit of 35MT as mentioned in the goods permit issued by the

Transport Department, Bihar.

6. The learned counsel further submitted that in view of

Rule 56 of the Rules, 2021, the officers are empowered to seize

the vehicle if it is found without a valid challan or permit, in

accordance with law. However, in the instant case, the gross

vehicle weight was found to be well withing the permissible

limit and yet the respondent authorities, in hope of illegal

gratification, wrongly seized the vehicle and taken it into

custody.

7. The learned counsel further submitted that the

respondent authorities in excess of their powers have

overlooked the challan, determined the weight of the loaded

sand on their own and wrongly seized the vehicle harassing the

petitioner mentally and financially.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
5/10

8. The learned counsel further submitted that the gross

vehicle weight was duly found within the permissible laden

limit as given in the certificate of registration of the vehicle, the

letter dated 27.11.2023 directing the petitioner to pay penalty of

Rs. 2,65,596/- within thirty days is not sustainable in the eyes of

law. In this regard, the learned counsel relied upon a judgment

dated 26.04.2024 of this Court passed in CWJC No. 11469 of

2023.

9. The learned counsel further submitted that the

mineral such as sand which is under transportation in the instant

case has to be measured in volume as relevant provisions for

different miners are classified in their respective measuring

units. In other words, it can be said that the volume of sand may

differ in weight and, therefore, simple calculation of deducting

the unladen weight of truck from the gross weight of the truck

could not determine the actual quantity of sand being

transported. Therefore, the respondent no. 5 was wrong in

considering the weight of the sand while it ought to have been

measured in volume and the same could be verified with the

quantity mentioned in the challan.

10. The learned counsel further submitted that in case

of any dual method of determination of weight of the vehicle or
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
6/10

permissible limit of challan, this Court may direct the

respondent authorities to reweigh the loaded sand in volume so

as to verify the challan dated 05.11.2023 wherein volume of

yellow sand and its equivalent weight is mentioned.

11. Thus, learned counsel submitted that seizure of

vehicle has caused financial loss to the petitioner and also led

deterioration in value of the vehicle and it would further hamper

the business of the petitioner leading to deprivation of the right

of the petitioner conferred under Articles 14 and 21 of the

Constitution of India.

12. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of Department of Mines vehemently contended that the

vehicle of the petitioner has been rightly seized. The learned

counsel raised a preliminary objection with regard to

maintainability of the writ petition in view of the fact that the

impugned letter dated 27.11.2023 issued by the respondent no.

3, which has sought to be set aside in the present writ petition, is

an appealable order to be challenged before the Collector under

Rule 67(1) of the Bihar Minerals (Concession, Prevention of

Illegal Mining, Transportation, Storage) Rules, 2019

(hereinafter to be referred as 'the Rules, 2019').

13. The learned counsel further submitted that after
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
7/10

seizure of the vehicle, the Mining Inspector, Motihari prepared a

seizure list of the said truck and subsequently, the challan of the

truck for transportation of sand was produced by the owner of

the said truck/petitioner and from perusal of the said challan, it

transpired that the total weight of the truck including sand was

22.70 MT, whereas as per the registration certificate of the said

truck, it transpired that the total capacity of the truck to carry

any mineral was 35,000 Kg and total weight of the empty truck

was 10,000 Kg. Subsequently, the truck loaded with sand was

weighed in the presence of the petitioner, whereupon the total

weight of the truck loaded with sand came as 34,695 Kg.

14. The learned counsel further submitted that after

deducting the total estimated weight of the empty truck i.e.

10,000 kg from the total weight of the truck loaded with sand

i.e. (34,695-10,000) comes as 24,695 Kg. Learned counsel

further submitted that according to mineral transit pass/e-challan

Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Bihar, 1 MT

of sand is equivalent to 25 CFT sand in volumetric quantity and,

in such circumstance, the total 24.695 MT of sand being carried

on the vehicle in question is equivalent to 617.25 CFT sand.

15. The learned counsel further submitted that from

perusal of the challan dated 05.11.2023 issued by the
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
8/10

Government of Bihar, it would be apparent that the total

permissible quantity of sand allowed to be transported was

567.50 CFT and therefore the vehicle in question was

overloaded with (617.25-567.50 CFT) i.e. 49.75 CFT sand.

16. The learned counsel further submitted that the

illegal transportation of 49.75 CFT excess sand has caused loss

to the public exchequer and, in such circumstance, following the

provisions stipulated in proviso to Rule 56(2) of the Rules,

2019, the Mineral Development Officer, East Champaran,

Motihari, issued a memo no. 959 dated 27.11.2023 to the

petitioner imposing a cost of penalty as well as the amount of

compounding fee, which comes to the tune of Rs. 2,65,596/- and

as such the imposition of penalty is in consonance and within

the four corners of the proviso to Rule 56(2) of the Rules, 2019.

17. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the

rival submission of the parties and perused the records.

18. Having regard to the rival submission as well as

claim and counter claim regarding overloading, it appears the

vehicle of the petitioner was re-weighed on weighbridge and it

was found to be carrying sand in excess of the permissible

weight to the tune of 49.75 CFT which roughly comes around 2

MT. So, action of the respondent no.5 appears to be in tune with
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
9/10

the statutory provision especially Section 56(1) (2) and Section

60(2) of the ‘Rules 2021’. Therefore, no orders could be passed

for release of the vehicle straightway as prayed for by the

petitioner.

19. However, considering the fact that the petitioner

claims that when the vehicle was loaded and weighed at the

weighbridge, its laden weight came to be 34.19 MT (34190 kg.)

and subsequently when it was weighed at the instance of

respondent authorities, its weight came to be 34695 kg, the

difference appears to be only 505 kg. On the other hand, the

calculation of the Mining Department shows it to be overloaded

with 2 MT though the weight of the laden truck was found to be

34695 kg.

20. Therefore, I think it proper to allow the alternative

prayer of the petitioner for reweighing the vehicle both by

voumetric measurement as well as on weighbridge and the

concerned respondent authorities are directed to get the vehicle

of the petitioner reweighed by voumetric measurement as well

as on weighbridge by fixing a date in presence of the petitioner

or his representative within thirty days from the date of

receipt/production of a copy of this order.

21. At the same time, it is made clear that if the weight
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1419 of 2024 dt.20-02-2026
10/10

is found to be within permissible limit of challan, the vehicle of

the petitioner would be released forthwith. In case it is found to

be overloaded, the vehicle will be released after payment of

penalty amount of Rs.2,65,596/- in six equal monthly

installments considering the mandate of law and observation

made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court the case of Sunderbhai

Ambalal Desai vs. State of Gujarat, (2002) 10 SCC 283

regarding release of seized vehicles.

22. Accordingly, the present writ petition is partly

allowed.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 12.12.2025
Uploading Date 20.02.2026
Transmission Date 20.02.2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…