Neutral Citation No. (2026:JHHC:9252) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(Cr.) No. 617 of 2025 Deo Kumar Yadav, aged about 46 years, son of Bachchcha Yadav, resident of village- Devatara, Padarachh, P.O. and P.S.- Bhanswar, District- Sonebhadra, (U.P.) --- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner-cum- District Magistrate, Garhwa, P.O. and P.S.- Garhwa, District- Garhwa 3. The Superintendent of Police, P.O. and P.S.- Garhwa and District- Garhwa --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the Resp.-State : Mrs. Sunita Kumari, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-II 04/01.04.2026 1. Heard Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Sunita Kumari, learned A.C. to Sr. S.C.-II for the State. 2. In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for direction upon the respondents to set aside the entire confiscation proceedings being confiscation Case No.20/2020-21 and 23/2020-21 arising out of Ketar P.S. Case No.48 of 2020 registered under Sections 379/ 411/ 420/ 120/34 of I.P.C., Rule 54 of JMMC(AR) and Section 21 of MMDR Act including the order dated 29.10.2021 passed by the Court of Deputy Commissioner- cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa by virtue of which the petitioner has been directed to deposit an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- in order to release the truck bearing registration No.UP64AT-3471 and UP64AT-9021 respectively. 3. Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa is not the appropriate authority to confiscate the vehicle under the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. It has further been submitted that in W.P.(C) No.6788 of 2023, Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017 has been declared ultra vires. -2- 4. Learned counsel, in such circumstances, submits that entire confiscation proceeding deserves to be quashed and set aside and the amount of Rs.2,00,000/- which he has deposited out of Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- as directed in the order dated 29.10.2021 be ordered to be refunded to him. 5. Similar writ applications have been brought on record and reference has been made to the order dated 07.07.2025 passed in W.P.(Cr.) No.420 of 2025, wherein it has been held at paragraphs-5 to 7 as follows:- “ 5. Admittedly, the confiscation proceeding was in terms of Rule 11(v) of the Jharkhand Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2017. The aforesaid provision has been declared ultra vires by this Court in WP(C) No. 6788 of 2023. 6. Since the provision of law under which, confiscation was done has been declared ultra vires, the entire confiscation proceeding being Confiscation Case No. 05/2020-21 before the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa is set aside. All consequential orders are also set aside. 7. The amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (five lakh) which has been deposited by the petitioner, should be refunded to the petitioner within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order”. 6. In W.P.(Cr.) No.272 of 2024, it has been held at paragraphs-5 and 6 as follows:- “ 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that as per the mandate of Section 21(4-A) of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulations) Act, 1957, only the criminal court taking cognizance of the offence is competent to pass the order of confiscation and the Deputy Commissioner has no such power. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment dated 08.01.2024, passed in W.P.(Cr.) No.751 of 2023, by this -3- Court and has submitted that the said issue has already been settled by this Court. 6. Considering the fact that the Deputy Commissioner is not a competent authority to pass the order of confiscation. Accordingly, the order dated 29.10.2021, passed by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa, in Confiscation Case No.24/2020- 21 is, hereby, quashed and set-aside. 7. In view of the settled principle of law as noted above and since the Deputy Commissioner is not the competent authority to initiate a confiscation proceeding, the proceeding of confiscation Case No.20/2020-21 and 23/2020-21 arising out of Ketar P.S. Case No.48 of 2020 is hereby quashed and set aside and since the petitioner had deposited an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- before the Najarat, out of an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- as directed by the order dated 29.10.2021, the concerned respondent is directed to refund the said amount within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order. Consequent to the quashment of confiscation case No.20/2020-21 and 23/2020-21, the order dated 29.10.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Garhwa is also hereby quashed and set aside. 8. This writ application is allowed. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) Dated:01.04.2026 Jay/-