SHIYAL DHIRABHAI MASHRUBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH
- Bench
- HEMANT M PRACHCHHAK
Holding
In the absence of a complaint filed within the period prescribed under the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017, the seizure is invalid and the vehicle must be released.
Summary
The petitioner, Shiyal Dhirabhai Mashrubahai, filed a special civil application seeking the release of his tractor (Reg. No. GJ-13-CB-1084) seized on 3 December 2025 by authorities under the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. The petitioner argued that no complaint had been filed by the respondents as required by the Rules, and relied on a prior coordinate bench order in S.C.A. No.8664 of 2024. The respondents admitted that no complaint had been filed. The Court held that, under the Rules, a written complaint must be filed and the seized property produced within the stipulated period; failure to do so invalidates the seizure. Consequently, the Court ordered the immediate release of the vehicle, clarifying that the order is limited to release and does not preclude future legal action. The application was disposed of without costs and without addressing the merits of the underlying case.
Issues considered
- Whether a seizure of a vehicle under the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 is valid in the absence of a complaint filed within the prescribed period.
- Whether the authority can continue to retain the seized vehicle without complying with the procedural requirements of the Rules.
Subjects
Judgment
C/SCA/7166/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7166 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
SHIYAL DHIRABHAI MASHRUBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. NIKHIL R OZA(9911) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ANGESH PANCHAL for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 08/05/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.
Angesh Panchal waives serves of Rule 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 03 rd
Page 1 of 3
C/SCA/7166/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
December, 2025 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 Tractor bearing registration No.GJ-
13-CB-1084 pending the proceedings. Learned advocate
in support of his contentions places reliance on the order
passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 08th
August, 2024 in Special Civil Application No.8664 of
2024.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for
the respondents upon instructions received from Mr.J.S.
Vadher, Geologist, In-charge, Surendranagar, submits
that no complaint has been filed yet and that therefore,
appropriate order may be passed in the present case.
5. 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
Page 2 of 3
C/SCA/7166/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 08/05/2026
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 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
forthwith release the vehicle of the petitioner. 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.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the
merits of the case and no observation is made thereon.
8. 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.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SURESHKUMAR MOTIBHAI SOLANKI(HC00208), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 08/05/2026 18:10:07
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.