HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 4174 of 2025 Court No. - 86 HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist aggrieved with the order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur in Misc. Application No. 2095 of 2025 (State Vs. Azam Khan), Police Station A.R.T.O./Ahraura, District Mirzapur whereby the application of the revisionist to release the vehicle No. UP- 71 AT 1597 was rejected. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that the impugned order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur is absolutely wrong and illegal. The learned Magistrate did not properly appreciate the matter and documents on record. It is further submitted that it was a matter under Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1957). It is next submitted that the report dated 13.05.2025 submitted by the Mines Officer reveals that a total 11 online challans were generated by RFID Reader and Cameras situated at the check points but however, no physical copy was ever furnished to the revisionist and challans were sent to the revisionist by e-mail. Since the revisionist seldom checks e-mail, he was not aware of the previous challans generated against his vehicle. It is also submitted that the challans were submitted even without checking the MM-11 Form. No physical inspection was made at the check post and driver of the Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Birendra Singh, Swati Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Azam Khan .....Revisionist(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) vehicle was absolutely innocent regarding challans. No complaint was ever filed to the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate regarding illegal transaction of minerals by the revisionist and the prosecution totally ignored the relevant statutory rules. It is further submitted that Rule 12(8) of Uttar Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage), Rules 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules 2018) have not taken care of by the learned Magistrate. The penalty can be imposed only by checking stock to verify the quality and quantity of the minerals carried which required physical inspection but no such inspection was ever made. 4. It is further further argued that the District Magistrate is not competent authority to release seized minerals, plant, machinery, vehicles etc. for the offence under Section 21 of the Act 1957. It is next argued that since no complaint in writing was made by any person authorized on behalf of the Government, the court was not empowered to take cognizance for the offence punishable under the Act, 1957. It is also argued that no confiscation proceeding has been initiated at the end of District Magistrate concerned. It is also argued that the Hon'ble Apex Court and this Court have passed several orders in connection with the present matter and the orders passed by the Magistrate was quashed. It is next argued that the impugned order is illegal, arbitrary, erroneous, bad in the eyes of law and liable to be set aside by this Court. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the revision and it has been submitted that every action taken in this matter was in accordance with law and the revision is liable to be dismissed. 6. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned Magistrate was of the view that since the relevant online challans are found against the revisionist which caused huge loss to a tune of Rs. 4,58,720/-to the public exchequer and not the present revisionist, it would not proper to release the vehicle in question. 7. One last submission was made by learned counsel for the revisionist that if he may be permitted to deposit the entire amount of fine imposed upon him in installments, he is ready and willing to pay the entire CRLR No. 4174 of 2025 2 amount. 8. Learned A.G.A. has not made any objection to the aforesaid submission. 9. In my view, since the matter relates to the loss of public money, it is desirable to direct the revisionist to deposit the same in installments and the challans may be compounded, so that there would be no loss of the public money. Without going into the detail in furtherance of the Act, 1957, I feel it proper to direct the revisionist to pay the entire amount of challans in monthly installments of Rs. 40,000/- each as EMI and if he moves any affidavit for the same before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur where from the vehicle release application was rejected, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur is directed to release the vehicle in question after taking proper affidavit/undertaking from the revisionist. It is to be clarified that the revisionist is registered owner of the vehicle in question and no fruitful purpose shall be served if the vehicle in question remains lying in open place under the custody of police. 10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur in Misc. Application No. 2095 of 2025 (State Vs. Azam Khan), Police Station A.R.T.O./Ahraura, District Mirzapur is set aside. 11. With the aforesaid observations, the revision is accordingly allowed. September 3, 2025 Rmk. CRLR No. 4174 of 2025 3 (Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad