IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.150/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI. MANJUNATHA S/O THIMMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT KIREHALLI VILLAGE ALUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT -34.
(BY SRI. PRATHEEP K.C., ADVOCATE) AND:
STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE SAKALESHPURA RURAL POLICE STATION HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201 REP. BY S.P.P.
HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU.
(BY SRI. S. RACHAIAH., HCGP) ... PETITIONER ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITON IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINS IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER IS CONCERNED IN SAKALESHPURA P.S IN CRIME NO.191/17 U/S 4(1)21(1) OF MMDR ACT AND SECTION 379 OF IPC, IN C.C.NO.249/2018 AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. AT SAKALESHPURA.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner has been arraigned as accused No.7 in C.C.No.249/2018 registered by Sakaleshpura Rural Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 21(1) and 4(1) of Mines and Mineral (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short ‘MMDR Act’) and Section 379 of IPC, on the basis of complaint lodged by one Sri.Jagadeesh, Police Sub-Inspector on 28.05.2017 alleging that when he was in police station he received an information that sand was illegally transported. On receiving such information, he along with staff went to Vadoor village and saw five lorries were loaded with sand and on seeing the police, some of the persons fled away from the spot and five persons were apprehended on the spot and seized the vehicles. Based on the said complaint, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.191/2017 by Sakaleshpura Rural Police Station, which proceedings is now pending in C.C.No.249/2018. Hence, petitioner is before this Court for quashing of said proceedings.
2. I have heard the arguments of Sri.Pratheep K.C., learned Counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State. Perused the records.
3. It is the contention of Sri.Pratheep K.C., learned counsel appearing for petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated as accused without any justifiable reason and as such he submits that continuation of proceedings against petitioner is liable to be quashed. Hence, he prays for allowing the petition.
4. Per contra, Sri.S.Rachaiah, learned HCGP appearing for respondent-State would support the order passed by Sessions Court and prays for rejection of the petition.
5. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for parties and on perusal of records, it is noticed that respondent has not only initiated proceedings against petitioner for the offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code, but also for the offences punishable under the provisions of MMDR Act.
6. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of STATE OF NCT OF DELHI –vs- SANJAY AND OTHERS reported in AIR 2015 SC 75 has held where the offences are punishable under the MMDR Act, no Court can take cognizance of such offence unless an authorized officer files a complaint under Section 22 of the MMDR Act and in the event of cognizance having been taken on the basis of a Police report, such proceedings cannot be continued as it would be an illegality. In these circumstances, Hon’ble Apex Court has held that such proceedings are liable to be quashed, inasmuch as, accused cannot be made to face the ordeal of trial since jurisdictional Magistrate would have no power to take cognizance and convict the accused on the basis of a Police report.
7. Following the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court, Coordinate Benches of this Court have consistently held that proceedings initiated on the basis of a Police report for the offences punishable under the MMDR Act, cannot be sustained and as such, has quashed the proceedings in W.P.No.54390/2017, Crl.P.No.9358/2017 and Crl.P.No.307/2018 disposed of on 01.02.2018, 04.12.2017 and 19.03.2018 respectively. As such, continuation of proceedings against petitioner in the instant case for the offences punishable under the MMDR Act, cannot be allowed to continue as it would be an abuse of process of law. However, liberty is being reserved to the Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Karnataka, to initiate appropriate proceedings against petitioners in terms of Section 22 of the MMDR Act.
8. Now turning my attention to the contention raised by the learned Counsel appearing for petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated, when seen in the background of case papers, it would not detain this Court for long to brush aside said contention for the reason that jurisdictional Police, who conducted the raid and apprehended accused No.7, have alleged that petitioner had also indulged in theft of sand. As to whether procedure followed to register the complaint by respondent is correct or not, are all issues, which will have to be thrashed out after trial and at this stage, in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction, this Court would not be in a position to quash the proceedings insofar as offence under the Indian Penal Code, which has been alleged against the petitioner.
Hence, for the reasons aforestated, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER (i) Criminal Petition is allowed in part.
(ii) Proceedings pending against petitioner in C.C.No.249/2018 insofar as it relates offences punishable under Sections 21(1) and 4(1) of MMDR Act, 1957, is hereby quashed.
(iii) The Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Karnataka, would be at liberty to initiate proceedings under the Act in the manner known to law;
(iv) However, proceedings pending against petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC shall be proceeded in accordance with law.
SD/- JUDGE DR