High Court of Gujarat
KRUNALSINGH RANDHIRSINGH VIRPURAversusTHE GEOLOGIST , NAVSARI
- Decided
- Disposal
- 58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH
- Bench
- NIRZAR S DESAI
Holding
Because the complaint was filed after the 45‑day period mandated by Rule 12 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, the seized vehicle must be released to the petitioner subject to an undertaking.
Summary
The petitioner, Krunalsinh Randhirsingh Virpura, had his Tata Hitachi excavator seized by the Geologist, Navsari on 11‑April‑2026. A complaint (Sessions Case No. 51 of 2026) was filed only after the 45‑day period prescribed by Rule 12 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. The petitioner argued that the delayed complaint entitled him to the release of the vehicle pending trial, relying on a prior judgment of this Court (SCA No. 8664 of 2024). The respondents contended that the offence could be compounded and that the complaint was untimely. The Court held that because the complaint was filed beyond the statutory period, the seizure could not be justified and ordered the vehicle’s release subject to an oath‑undertaking not to transfer or encumber the equipment and to produce it when directed. No merits of the underlying illegal‑mining allegation were addressed, and the matter was left to the District and Sessions Court for trial. The Special Civil Application was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a seizure under the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 must be released when the complaint is filed after the 45‑day period prescribed by Rule 12.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to the release of the seized vehicle pending trial without furnishing a bank guarantee.
- Whether the respondent authorities may take further action against the petitioner despite the delayed complaint.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- illegal mining
- seizure of equipment
- procedural compliance
- Gujarat Mineral Rules
- release of seized property
- undertaking
- compound offence
Judgment
C/SCA/9949/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9949 of 2026
==========================================================
KRUNALSINGH RANDHIRSINGH VIRPURA
Versus
THE GEOLOGIST , NAVSARI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. SOHEL H SHAIKH(17661) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
ANGESH PANCHAL AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 23/07/2026
ORDER
1. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Angesh
Panchal waives service of Rule for and on behalf of the
respondents.
2. With the consent of the learned advocates for the parties,
the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal.
3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the vehicle
of the petitioner has been seized on 11.04.2026 by the
respondent authorities and the complaint is preferred by the
authorities before the Court below after completion of the
stipulated period, i.e. after 45 days. Learned advocate submits
that since the complaint has been filed after the stipulated
period, as per the Rule 12 of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention
Page 1 of 4
C/SCA/9949/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026
of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, the
petitioner is entitled to release of his vehicle TATA HITACHI
Excavator Machine ZAXIS-140H Hydraulic Excavator with RB
kit, Serial No.THEDAOJ00000751 pending the proceedings.
Learned advocate in support of his contentions places reliance
on the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court
dated 8th August, 2024 in Special Civil Application No.8664 of
2024.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents, upon instructions received from P.R.Khambhla,
Geologist, Navsari, submits that however, the petitioner has
also approached the authorities to compound the offence
earlier. He further submitted that the complaint, i.e. Sessions
Case No.51 of 2026, has been filed after the stipulated period
of time under the Rules. Learned Assistant Government Pleader
submits that appropriate order may be passed in the present
case.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions, it is revealed that the
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
Page 2 of 4
C/SCA/9949/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026
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.
6. In view of the fact that the vehicle in question having been
seized on 11.04.2026 and the complaint has been filed after 45
days, the vehicle of the petitioner be released on the following
conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall file an undertaking on oath before
the competent authority that the petitioner shall not
transfer, alienate, part with the possession of the vehicle
having registration TATA HITACHI Excavator Machine
ZAXIS-140H Hydraulic Excavator with RB kit, Serial
No.THEDAOJ00000751 or create any charge over the
vehicle in question till the conclusion of the trial.
(ii) The petitioner shall produce the vehicle having
registration TATA HITACHI Excavator Machine ZAXIS-
140H Hydraulic Excavator with RB kit, Serial
Page 3 of 4
C/SCA/9949/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/07/2026
No.THEDAOJ00000751 as and when the authority or the
Court concerned directs him to do so.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits
of the case and no observation is made thereon.
8. The District and Sessions Court, Navsari shall decide the
complaint on its on merits in accordance with law. It is also
made clear that the respondent authorities are permitted to
take appropriate step(s) in accordance with law against the
petitioner under the Rules, 2017.
9. In view of the aforesaid observations, the present Special
Civil Application stands Disposed of. Rule is made absolute
accordingly. No order as to costs. Direct Service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
BHAVIN MEHTA
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE ONE, at High Court of Gujarat on 23/07/2026 17:02:35
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.