Madras High Court
Chandrakanthan vs The Inspector Of Police on 8 August, 2016
Author: B.Gokuldas
Bench: B.Gokuldas
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 08.08.2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.GOKULDAS
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4758 of 2010 &
M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2010
Chandrakanthan
Prop.Vinayaga Agencies
Sand Dealer, Pulimoode,
Chennithottam,
Kanyakumari District. .. Petitioner/A1
Vs.
The Inspector of Police,
Kuzhithurai Police Station,
Kanyakumari District. .. Respondent/De-Complainant
Prayer:-Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to
call for the records pertaining to the final report/charge sheet in C.C.No.63
of 2010, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai,
Kanyakumari District and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Balameenakshi
For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan (Criminal Side)
Government Advocate
:ORDER
This criminal original petition is filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.63 of 2010, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai, Kannyakumari District.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.12.2009, at about 06.00 hrs, when a police team headed by the respondent intercepted four lorries bearing registration Nos.K.L.01-F-7128, T.N.60.A-9699, T.N.60-2133 and T.N.60-8883, at Pulimoode, Chennithottam, the drivers and cleaners of the said lorries fled away by abandoning the vehicles, which on search were found loaded with sand without due permission.
3. According to the petitioner, the transportation of sand was only from the licensed sales depots and also on valid documents like copy of driving license, insurance policy, Bill for the purchase of sand. Further, the petitioner is having a valid Registration Certificate for the sale of sand from the Commercial Tax Department. According to him, registering a criminal case and filing a final report under Section 4(iA) of Mines and Minerals Development Regulation Act by the respondent police was wholly unwarranted. Even if the allegation is assumed for the sake of argument as true, the power to search or take action over illegal transportation of sand is vested only with the Revenue Divisional Officer. Hence, the registration of case and filing of Charge Sheet against the petitioner by the respondent police, being totally contrary to the legal procedure, the entire proceedings are liable to be quashed. In support of his contention, the petitioner has placed reliance on the order of this Court, dated 03.12.2009, made in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.10596 of 2009, wherein, at paragraphs 4 and 5, it has been held as follows:-
?4. In this case, admittedly, there is no such specific complaint by an authorized person to enable the learned Magistrate to take cognizance against the petitioner herein under the provisions of Section 4(1A) r/w.21(1) of Mines and Mineral Development and Regulation Act, 1957.
5. In view of the same, the charge under Section 4(1A) r/w 21(1) of the Mines and Mineral Development and Regulation Act, 1957 is hereby quashed.?
4. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side).
5. It is admitted by the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) that, in the present case also, no specific complaint had been given by an authorized person to enable the learned Magistrate to take cognizance against the petitioner under Section 4(1-A) r/w21(1) of the Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957, and 36(A) of the Tamilnadu Mine and Minerals Act, 1957. Therefore, following the above said order, the proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.63 of 2010 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District are quashed. The criminal original petition is allowed. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
To The Judicial Magistrate No.I, Thoothukudi..