Patna High Court
Nirmal Singh @ Nirmal Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The petition does not merit interference; the application is dismissed and the petitioner is ordered to produce the payloader within seven days.
Summary
Nirmal Singh filed a writ petition seeking the quashment of an order that had impounded his payloader (vehicle) on suspicion of involvement in illegal sand mining under sections 379 and 411 of the IPC and various mining regulations. The petitioner was earlier directed to approach the Mines Commissioner, whose representation was rejected on the ground that the loader was linked to illegal mining after its number plate was removed. During the hearing, the court questioned how the loader, belonging to Rohtas, was found at an illegal mining site in Aurangabad and why its number plate was missing. The petitioner’s counsel could not satisfactorily explain these facts. Consequently, the court found no merit for interference, dismissed the petition, recalled an earlier order, and directed the petitioner to produce the payloader within seven days.
Issues considered
- Whether the order impounding the petitioner’s payloader should be quashed and the vehicle released.
- Whether the petitioner has shown sufficient cause to challenge the seizure under the applicable mining and criminal statutes.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379, 411
- Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act — s. Rule 04(1A), Rule 21
Subjects
- illegal mining
- vehicle seizure
- writ petition
- quashment
- Mines Commissioner
- Indian Penal Code
- section 379
- section 411
- mining regulations
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7509 of 2025
======================================================
Nirmal Singh @ Nirmal Kumar Singh S/o Ramdev Singh, Resident of Suba
Bigaha, P.O. and P.S.-Jamuhar, Dist-Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Mines Commissioner, Department of Mines
and Geology, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Additional Chief Secertary (ACS) cum Mines Commissioner,
Department of Mines and Geology, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Director General of Police, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, Aurangabad, Bihar.
5. The Superintendent of Police, Aurangabad, Bihar.
6. The Officer in Charge, Barun Police Station, District-Aurangabad.
7. The District Mining Officer, Aurangabad.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Standing Counsel 26
For the Mines : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Spl. PP
Mr. Brij Bihari Tiwari, Advocate
Ms. Shruti Singh, Advocate
Mr. Utkarsh Pathak, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
6 22-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the
Mines Department.
2. This writ petition has been filed for commanding
and directing the authority concern for the quashment of the
order dated 03-12-2024 passed in Misc Appeal No. 02/2024 and
release of the Vehicle of the Petitioner Bearing Reg.No.
BR24GB-4420, Chassis No. IPY5060EEJA002753, Engine No.
Patna High Court CWJC No.7509 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
2/3
PY3029H118987, which has been seized/impounded merely on
suspicion in connection with Barun, P. S. Case No 366 of 2022,
filed dated 17-08-2022 registered for the offences punishable
under section 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code and rule
04(1A), 21 of the Mines and Minerals Development and
Regulation Act and Rules 11, 18, 43, 46 of the Bihar Minerals
Concession & Prevention of illegal mining Transportation and
Storage Rules.
3. Earlier the petitioner had approached this Court
through C.W.J.C. No. 7050 of 2023 in which the petitioner was
directed to file a representation before the Mines Commissioner,
Department of Mines and Geology, Bihar, Patna which was to
be considered by the Mines Commissioner.
4. The Mines Commissioner has considered the
representation of the petitioner and has rejected the same on the
ground that the payloader of the petitioner was found involved
in illegal sand mining after removing the number plate. The
counter affidavit of the DTO provides the registration number of
the payloader.
5. During the hearing, this Court has put some
questions to the learned counsel for the petitioner. The first
question was whether as to how did the payloader of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.7509 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
3/3
petitioner reached the place of illegal mining site when the
petitioner belongs to Rohtas and the payloader has been
recovered from Aurangabad.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the loader had been taken for some legal purpose. The learned
counsel for the petitioner has not been able to explain as to how
the loader was caught at the site of illegal mining. He has also
not been able to explain as to how and why the number plate of
the payloader was not there on the payloader when the illegal
mining was detected.
7. In these circumstances, I do not find it a fit case for
interference. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
8. The order dated 04.11.2025 is hereby recalled. The
petitioner is directed to produce the payloader before the
respondent authorities within 7 days failing which the
respondent authorities will take all steps for the same.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U
Checking your session…