Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

M/S. SHIVAM STONEversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Disposal
58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

Holding

The seizure form dated 06‑03‑2026 is quashed and set aside because the requisite complaint under the Rules was not filed, and the seized vehicle must be released.

Summary

M/S Shivam Stone filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, invoking the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act, 1957 and the Gujarat Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, seeking release of a seized Tata Hitachi machine and related assets. The seizure order dated 06‑03‑2026 was issued by the Executive Magistrate, Muli, but no formal complaint was filed as mandated by the Rules. The Court observed that without the required complaint, the authority had no jurisdiction to continue the seizure. Consequently, the Court directed the release of the vehicle within a week and quashed the seizure form. The petition was disposed without addressing the merits of the underlying dispute.

Issues considered

  • The validity of a seizure under the Gujarat Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 when no complaint is filed within the stipulated period.
  • Whether the authority can continue to retain seized property absent a complaint.
  • The scope of relief that can be granted in a writ petition under Article 226 concerning the quashing of a seizure order.

Subjects

Article 226seizurequashing ordermineral regulationsGujarat Minerals Rules 2017illegal miningwrit petitionjurisdiction

Judgment

     C/SCA/4118/2026                              JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4118 of 2026


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
================================================================

            Approved for Reporting               Yes          No

================================================================
                           M/S. SHIVAM STONE
                                  Versus
                        STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR KRUTI M SHAH WITH MR JAY N SHAH(10668) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1
MS DIXA PANDYA, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s)
No. 1,2,3,4,5
================================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
       PRACHCHHAK

                             Date : 17/04/2026

                               JUDGMENT


1.      RULE returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government
Pleader Ms. Dixa Pandya, waives service of notice of Rule for and on
behalf of the respondents.

2.      With the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the
matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal.


3.      By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India read with the provisions of the Mines and Minerals
(Development and Regulations) Act, 1957 (hereinafter be referred to
as “the Act”) and under the provisions of the Gujarat Minerals


                                 Page 1 of 4
     C/SCA/4118/2026                                    JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026




(Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017
(hereinafter be referred to as “the Rules”), petitioner has prayed for
the following reliefs :


        “(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or
        direction to call record of proceedings and documents in connections to the
        seizure form dated 6.3.226 relying on which impugned seizer form is
        issued;

        (B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or
        direction of quashing and setting aside the seizure proceedings including
        the impugned seizure form dated 06.03.2026 issued by Executive
        Magistrate, Muli (Annexed hereto as Annexure – A), being without
        jurisdiction;

        (C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your
        Lordships may be pleased to release the Tata Hitachi machine (Sr. No.
        SP13-14990), two plants and 150 MT Manufactured Sand mentioned in
        seizure form dated 06.03.2026;

        (D) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant any other relief/s which deems
        fit and proper in the interest of justice.”


4.      Heard learned counsel Ms. Kruti M. Shah assisted by Mr. Jay N.
Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Dixa Pandya, learned
Assistant      Government      Pleader,     appearing      on    behalf     of       the
respondents.

5.      Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the vehicle of
the petitioner has been seized on 07.03.2026 by the respondent
authorities and till date, no complaint has been filed by the
respondents. Learned counsel submits that since the complaint has
not been filed as per provisions of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of
Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, the petitioner
is entitled to release of his vehicle, being Tata Hitachi machine (Sr.
No. SP13-14990) pending the proceedings.

6.      Ms. Dixa Pandya, learned Assistant Government Pleader,

                                     Page 2 of 4
     C/SCA/4118/2026                             JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026




appearing for the respondents, upon instructions received from Mr.J.S.
Vadher, Geologist, Surendranagar, submits that no complaint has
been filed yet and that therefore, appropriate order may be passed in
the present case.

7.      In view of the aforesaid submissions, it is revealed that no
complaint has not been filed within the stipulated period of time
under the Rules, 2017. Various orders have been passed by this
Court, wherein it has been held that it would be obligatory on the part
of the investigator to approach the Court of Sessions with a written
complaint and produce the seized properties before the Court within
the stipulated period under the Rules. In absence of such exercise,
the purpose of seizure and the bank guarantee would stand
frustrated. Resultantly, the property will have to be released in favour
of the person from whom it was seized without insisting for the bank
guarantee.

8.      In view of the enunciation of law and in absence of any
complaint filed, it would not be within the authority of the respondent
authority to continue seizure of the vehicle and therefore, the
authority concerned is directed to release the vehicle of the
petitioner, within a period of one week. It is clarified that the present
writ petition has been entertained only for the limited purpose of
releasing the vehicle of the petitioner. It will be open to the petitioner
to avail of the remedy available in law. It is also clarified that this
order shall not preclude the officers to initiate any proceedings, in
accordance with law.

9.      It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of
the case and no observation is made thereon.


                                 Page 3 of 4
          C/SCA/4118/2026                                                       JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2026




  10.        In view of the aforesaid observations, the present petition
  stands disposed of. The impugned seizure form dated 06.03.2026
  issued by the Executive Magistrate, Muli, Suredranagar is hereby
  quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order
  as to costs.
             Direct Service is permitted.


                                                                      (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)

  Dolly




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: DOLLYBEN CHETANBHAI VADUKAR(HC01392), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/04/2026 17:47:10

                                                      Page 4 of 4


Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "Article 226"Sign in to search

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.