End of MV Act Case Does Not Free Vehicle Facing Mining Confiscation: Rajasthan High Court

The petitioner's dumper was seized by the police under Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act (paras 1-2). In a complaint under Sections 3/181, 39/192 and 146/96 of that Act, the driver pleaded guilty and was released on probation on 21.04.2026; the Magistrate directed that the vehicle be released if not required in any other case (para 3). The police refused to hand it over because proceedings before the Mining Department were pending, and the petitioner sought a direction for its release (para 4). The State said the vehicle had been found transporting illegal mineral and faced confiscation (para 5).

The Court applied its detailed judgment of the same day in Phusaram v. State of Rajasthan, which governs the release of vehicles seized under the MV Act or by mining authorities, or involved in a criminal prosecution (para 7). Although the driver had been released on probation, those proceedings were under the MV Act and concerned only the offences under it (para 8). Confiscation proceedings by the Mining Department and criminal proceedings are separate, so the conclusion of a criminal case, whether under the MMDR Act or the MV Act, does not automatically release the vehicle (para 9). The Magistrate's order was conditional on the vehicle not being needed in another case and did not mention the mining proceedings, apparently because the Magistrate dealt only with the MV Act complaint and called for no report from the Mining Department (para 10). Release is therefore subject to the confiscation proceedings and can be ordered only after the Magistrate considers that report; no such application had been considered (para 11).