IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.4760 OF 2017 BETWEEN:
MARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS S/O. SONNAPPA BUKKANAHALLI CHINTAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. … PETITIONER (BY SHRI M. VINAYA KEERTHY, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY CHINTAMANI RURAL POLICE CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BENGALURU-560 001.
2. REVENUE INSPECTOR AMBAJIDURGA HOBLI CHINTAMANI TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI NASRULLA KHAN, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR IN CRIME NO.220/2017 REGISTERED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT CHINTAMANI RURAL POLICE U/S 379 OF IPC AND SECTION 42(1) OF KARNATAKA MINOR MINERALS CONSISTENT RULE, 1994, SECTION 21(4) OF MMRD ACT, 1957.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Heard Shri M. Vinaya Keerthy, learned advocate for the petitioner and Shri Nasrulla Khan, learned HCGP for the State.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that on 03.06.2017, the Geologist of Mines and Geology Department issued a notice to the petitioner stating that sand was stored in Sy.No.59 belonging to the petitioner and called upon him to produce Permit issued by the Department or any other document to justify the possession of sand. On the same date, FIR No.220/2017 was registered by Revenue Inspector in Chintamani Rural Police Station for offences punishable under Rule 42(1) of Karnataka Minor Mineral Consistent Rules, 1994 (‘KMMC Rules’ for short), Section 21(4) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (‘MMDR Act’ for short) and Section 379 of IPC.
3. He further submits that the sand in question was purchased by petitioner’s son-in-law from Public Works Department, as per receipt dated 29.06.2019, and the same was stored in his premises. The Geologist having issued a notice on 03.06.2017. Revenue Inspector had no authority to file the instant FIR. Accordingly, he prays for allowing this petition.
4. Learned HCGP argued in support of the complaint.
5. I have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the records.
6. Admittedly, the Geologist has issued notice on 03.06.2017 calling upon the petitioner to justify possession of the sand. On the very same date, Revenue Inspector has registered the FIR. This Court has taken a consistent view under the MMDR Act, only a complaint under Section 200 is maintainable and FIR cannot be registered. In the circumstances, registration of FIR is unsustainable. Resultantly, this petition merits consideration and hence the following:
ORDER (i) Petition allowed;
(ii) FIR No.220/2017 registered in Chintamani Rural Police Station pending on the file of Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) & JMFC, Chintamani, is quashed; and (iii) Petitioner is granted liberty to reply to the notice dated 03.06.2017 issued by the Geologist within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV