Patna High Court

Manoj Kumar MehtaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 April 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED
Bench: RAJIV ROY

Holding

The seizure without production of a valid challan was held unlawful, and the court directed the mining department to videograph future interceptions and ordered the petitioner to seek relief from the District Mining Officer within a stipulated period.

Summary

Manoj Kumar Mehta, the owner of a truck, challenged the seizure of his vehicle by mining officials in Nawada on 11 January 2026, alleging that a valid challan had been issued but was not produced at the time of interception. The respondents argued that no challan was presented and the seizure was lawful. The court examined the conflicting claims and noted that similar cases often resulted in illegal seizures when documents were not produced. It directed the Department of Mines and Geology to videograph the entire interception and seizure process to ensure transparency. The court ordered the petitioner to approach the District Mining Officer within three days, who must decide on the release within two weeks, and disposed of the writ petition.

Issues considered

Whether the seizure of the petitioner's vehicle without production of a valid challan is unlawful.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to immediate release and interim relief pending the writ.
Whether the court can mandate videographic recording of vehicle interceptions to ensure procedural transparency.

Subjects

vehicle seizure
challan
mining department
interim relief
videography
administrative law
transparency

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1763 of 2026
======================================================
Manoj Kumar Mehta Son of Shivnarayan Mehta, R/o Village- Lengrapipar,
Post- Domachanch, P.S.- Domachanch, District- Koderma, Jharkhand-
825407.

... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Mines
and Geology, Government of Bihar, Vikas Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna.
2. The Director, Mines and Geology Department, Bihar, Patna.
3. The District Magistrate, Nawada.
4. The Assistant Director, Mines and Geology Department, Nawada.
5. The Mineral Development Officer, District Mining Office, Nawada.
6. The Mining Inspector, Nawada.
7. The S.H.O., Nemdarganj Police Station, Nawada.

... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shambhu Narayan Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Standing Counsel (24)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER

2 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. Shambhu Narayan Singh, learned counsel

for the petitioner and Mr. Naresh Dikshit representing the Mines

Department.

2. The present application has been preferred for the

following relief(s):

(i) for issuance of appropriate writ/writs,

direction/directions and order/orders for

quashing the illegal seizure of the

petitioner's vehicle bearing registration no.

JH-12-M-6943, Engine no.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/9

B5.6B6A220D06112B63856952, and chassis

no. MAT781005M3B03729 which is at Serial

No. (3) of the seizure memo dated 11.01.2026

which was seized by order dated 11.01.2026

contained in letter no. 01/Kha;

(ii) for issuance of appropriate writ/writs,

direction/directions and order/orders

directing the immediate release of the

petitioner's seized vehicle as its prolonged

seizure is causing financial distress

(iii) for Issuance of appropriate writ by

granting interim relief by directing the

release of the petitioner's vehicle during the

pendency of this writ petition;

(iv) for issuance of appropriate writ/writs,

direction/directions and order/orders. which

the petitioner is found entitled under the

facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The petitioner is owner of the truck having

Registration No. JH-12-M-6943 which was carrying stone

chips from Kodarma, Jharkhand and was to be delivered at

Patna City, Bihar. The petitioner contends that the challan was
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/9

issued by the proper authority at Jharkhand on 11.01.2026 at

08.40.20 PM and it was valid up to 13.01.2026 at 03.46.3.

4. The vehicle was intercepted/seized on 11.01.2026

at 10.20 PM under Nemdarganj Police Station in the district

of Nawada by the Mining officials of Nawada and it records

that on demand, no challan was produced. Accordingly,

following the due process, the truck along with the stone chips

were seized.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a

proper authority issued a challan. The admitted fact is that

interception took place on 11.01.2026 at 10.20 PM and the stand

is that the driver due to fear could not produce the challan which

followed the seizure.

6. Aggrieved, the writ petition.

7. A counter affidavit has come on behalf of the

Mining Department (respondent nos. 3 to 6) and the stand is that

it was found to be without any challan, intercepted by the

Police, checked by the Mining Inspector, Nawada which

followed the seizure.

8. The stand is that the challan issued/produced has

been procured from the authority after the seizure and was not

there at the time of interception.
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
4/9

9. Mr. Naresh Dikshit representing the Mining

Department submits that the petitioner should have approached

the District Mining Officer, Nawada initially before coming to

this Court and if he had appeared, immediate step would have

been taken to take the matter to its logical conclusion and in any

case, within a period of two weeks and not later.

10. This Court has taken note of the facts and the

submissions put forward by the parties. The petitioner owns a

truck. His stand is that the challan issued by the proper authority

records the release time as 11.01.2026 (08:15:37 PM). It was

valid up till 12.01.2026 (08.06.34 AM). Admittedly, the

interception took place on 11.01.2026 at 10.20 PM. On the other

hand, the stand of the respondents is that he failed to produce

the challan which followed the seizure of the truck.

12. This Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Mehta vs.

The State of Bihar & Ors. (C.W.J.C. No. 1173 of 2026) disposed

of 02.04.2026 took note of the fact that when the interception

takes place two different views comes forward before the Court:

(i) the stand of the Mining

Department remains that at the time

of interception, no challan was

produced;
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
5/9

(ii) the stand of the vehicle owner on

the other hand remains that it was

produced, ignored and seizure took

place.

13. In that background, the following order was

passed which has been incorporated in paragraphs 11 to 18 and

read as under:

11. This Court has come across

multiple such cases where the same

stand is taken by the vehicle

owner/Mining Official wherein it is

contended that valid challan was

produced, still interception/seizure

took place whereas the stand of

respondents remain that on demand,

no paper/challan was produced.

12. However, the respondents for the

reason best know have chosen not to

plug the holes as a result of which the

seizures have repeatedly been declared

illegal and direction made for the

release of the vehicle by successive
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
6/9

Courts.

13. In this modern era of technology,

when everything is available at the

drop of the hat, the minimum that is

expected from the officials carrying

out such exercise is to videograph the

entire process from the interception of

a vehicle till its seizure as is done in

the western countries.

14. If such an exercise is undertaken,

neither of the parties will have any

grievance and/or escape route shall be

there with regard to the interception/

demand of papers/ seizure. The

authority shall also be free of any

charges/allegation that is commonly

made by the aggrieved parties that

despite the production of all the valid

documents including the challan, as

the demand sought for was not

fulfilled, forcible seizure took place.

Their success rate before the Courts
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
7/9

shall also improve if through video

footage, they are able to prove that the

seizure has been made in accordance

with law.

15. To put the whole cat and mouse

game to come to an end, this Court

directs the Department of Mines and

Mineral, Bihar to issue necessary

directions to all its ground officials to

ensure that henceforth, the entire

process of interception of a vehicle

from the time it is intercepted to

demand of papers and upon failure to

produce the same and/or as vehicle

found overloaded etc, the same shall

be videographed without any cut and

along with the seizure document, the

pen drive shall also be handed over

and this fact be recorded in the seizure

order.

16. This exercise is necessary to bring

transparency to the whole exercise as
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
8/9

also to save the Department from the

financial loss as for want of

transparency, the whole exercise of

seizure of the vehicle comes to zero in

most of the cases.

17. This transparency is again

necessary to bring the litigation down

and come to the actual fact on the

point whether at the time of

interception, the truck/ vehicle was

having proper document to ply on the

road or not and/or whether it was

overloaded or not.

18. The order has to be enforced

immediately. It has been passed in the

presence of Mr. Naresh Dikshit,

learned Spl. P.P. Mines who

undertakes to communicate the same

to the Department forthwith for its

compliance.

14. So far as the case is concerned, accepting the

words of the learned Spl. P.P. Mines, the writ petition is
Patna High Court CWJC No.1763 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
9/9

disposed of allowing the petitioner to approach the District

Mining Officer, Nawada within three days and if such petition is

filed within the aforesaid time, the District Mining Officer,

Nawada shall be duty-bound to pass an order within a period of

fortnight thereafter. The short period has been given to the

parties on their own undertakings and taking into account the

fact that the truck which has been seized is deteriorating under

the sky.

15. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is

disposed of.

(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…