Karnataka High Court
Durgappa S/O Sangappa Huligri And Ors vs The State Through on 18 June, 2014
Author: Rathnakala
Bench: Rathnakala
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
CRL.P.No.200131/2014
C/W
CRL.P.Nos.200206/2014, 200235/2014,
200236/2014, 200340/2014, 200368/2014,
200369/2014, 200370/2014, 200371/2014 &
200372/2014
IN CRL.P.No.200131/2014
BETWEEN:
P. NARENDRA REDDY
S/O AMRUTHREDDY
AGE: 42 YEARS
OCC: CONTRACT WORK
R/O SHAHAKAR NAGAR
HANUMAKONDA
DIST.WARANGAL (AP)
PRESENTLY, R/O MUSTOOR CAMP
TQ.DEODURGA, DIST. RAICHUR
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI AVINASH A. UPLOANKAR, ADVOCATE)
2
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
DEVADURGA POLICE STATION
DIST. RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PEOCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE
THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC AT DEVADURGA, IN
C.C.No.350/2013 (CRIME No.141/2012) AGAINST THE
PETITIONERS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
IN CRL.P.No.200206/2014
BETWEEN:
BASAVARAJ @ BASAPPA
S/O SANNAGANGAPPA
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER
TQ.LINGSUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE P.S.I
MUDGAL P.S.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS AND
DISCHARGE THE PETITIONER IN THE CRIME No.98/2012 OF THE
3
MUDGAL P.S. IN C.C.No.734/2012, PENDING BEFORE THE JMFC AT
LINGASUGUR, AND ALSO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF'S AS THE
COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN CRL.P.No.200235/2014
BETWEEN:
MOHAN S/O BABANNA
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O GAJENDRAGAD, TQ.RON
DIST.GADAG
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MUDGAL POLICE STATION
TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.No.17/2012 PENDING ON THE FILE
OF THE PRL. SESSIONS JUDGE AT RAICHUR, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN CRL.P.No.200236/2014
BETWEEN:
1. DAWAL SAB
S/O KHASIM SAB JANGLI
AGE: 47 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
4
R/O HALEPET, MUDGAL
TQ. LINGASUGUR
DIST. RAICHUR
2. RAJASAB S/O VALISAB
AGE: 68 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O HALEPET, MUDGAL
TQ. LINGASUGUR
DIST. RAICHUR
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI GANESH NAIK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MUDGAL POLICE STATION
TQ. LINGASUGUR
DIST. RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. APP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND QUASH THE
ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN S.C.No.35/2012 PENDING ON THE FILE
OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT RAICHUR, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
IN CRL.P.No.200340/2014
BETWEEN:
1. HANUMANTHA
S/O NARASAPPA
AGE ABOUT 23 YEARS
OCC: DRIVER
R/O NANDIHAL VILLAGE
TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR-584 202
5
2. TAYANNA S/O HUSSAINAPPA
AGE ABOUT 24 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER
R/O SUNKESHWARA VILLAGE
TQ. MANVI, DIST. RAICHUR-584 202
3. HANUMANTHA
S/O GOKALAPPA
AGE ABOUT 25 YEARS
OCC: DRIVER
R/O ANUWAR VILLAGE
TQ. MANVI
DIST. RAICHUR-584 202
4. VEERABHADRAPPA
S/O BASANAGOUDA
AGE ABOUT 48 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O ALDAL VILLAGE, TQ. MANVI
DIST. RAICHUR-584 202
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY THE POLICE INSPECTOR
LINGASUGUR POLICE STATION
LINGASUGUR
DIST. RAICHUR-584 245
2. TULAJARAM SINGH
AGE: MAJOR
OCC: GOVT. OFFICIAL
NON GAZETTED
THAHASHIL OFFICE, RAICHUR
TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR-584101
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
6
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR No.733/2013 PENDING
BEFORE THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC LINGASUGUR IN CRIME
No.357/13 OF LINGASUGUR P.S. AGAINST PETITIONERS BY
RESPONDENT AT ANNEXURE-C AND D RESPECTIVELY, IN THE
INTERST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN CRL.P.No.200368/2014
BETWEEN:
1. DURGAPPA
S/O SANGAPPA HULIGRI
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O BASAVANAGAR ILKAL
TQ. HUNUGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT
2. SANNA DURGAPPA
S/O SATYAPPA BANDI
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O ALAMPUR, ILKAL
TQ. HUNUGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT
3. SHIVANAND S/O APPAJI
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O ALAMPUR ILKAL
TQ. HUNUGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT
4. VENKATESH GUDAGUNTI
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O ALAMPUR ILKAL
TQ. HUNUGUND, DIST. BAGALKOT
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI GURURAJ RAO KAKKERI, ADVOCATE)
7
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MUDGAL POLICE STATION
TQ.LINGASUGUR, DIST.RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION, CALL FOR THE
RECORDS AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME
No.48/2014, (MUDGAL POLICE STATION) PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE MUNSIF AND JMFC AT LINGASUGUR, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE.
IN CRL.P.No.200369/2014
BETWEEN:
1. SIDDARAMAPPA S/O BASALINGAPPA
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O SANTEKALLUR NOW AT MUDGAL
TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
2. DAWOOD S/O GOODSAB
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O MUDGAL, TQ. LINGASUGUR
DIST. RAICHUR
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI GURURAJ RAO KAKKERI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MUDGAL POLICE STATION
TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
8
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION, CALL FOR RECORDS
AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME No.46/2014
(MUDGAL POLICE STATION), PENDING ON THE FILE OF MUNCIF
AND JMFC AT LINGASUGUR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
IN CRL.P.No.200370/2014
BETWEEN:
1. DAWOOD S/O GOODSAB
AGE: 40 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS
R/O MUDGAL, TQ. LINGASUGUR
DIST. RAICHUR
2. CHANNAVEERANAGOUDA
S/O VEERAPPA, AGE: 60 YEARS
OCC: BUSINESS, R/O ADAPUR
TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI GURURAJ RAO KAKKERI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MUDGAL POLICE STATION
TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION, CALL FOR THE
9
RECORDS AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME
No.47/2014 (MUDGAL POLICE STATION) PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE MUNCIF AND JMFC AT LINGASUGUR.
IN CRL.P.No.200371/2014
BETWEEN:
1. CHANNAVEERAPPAGOUDA
S/O VEERANNAGOUDA
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O ADAPUR, TQ. LINGASUGUR
DIST. RAICHUR
2. SIDDARAMAPPA
S/O BASALINGAPPA SAVAKAR
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O SAUTEKELLUR, TQ. MASKI
DIST. RAICHUR
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI GURURAJRAO KAKKERI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MASKI POLICE STATION
TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ALLOW THE PETITION, QUASH THE ENTIRE
PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME No.46/2014, (MASKI POLICE STATION)
PENDING ON THE FILE OF MUNCIF AND JMFC AT LINGASUGUR, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
10
IN CRL.P.No.200372/2014
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. PAYAL D/O JYOTIN GANDI
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O HUBLI, TQ. & DIST. HUBLI-24
2. M/S SHAMALSHA GIRIDHARI MINERAL CO.
NEXT TO ELECTRIC GRID, KARWAR ROAD
HUBLI-24, BOTH REPRESENTED BY ITS
GPA HOLDER SHRI SHARANAPPA A. BADAWADGI
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE
R/O KHB COLONY, HEGGERI
EXTENSION HUBLI-24
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI GURURAJ RAO KAKKERI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE STATE THROUGH
MUDGAL POLICE STATION
TQ. LINGASUGUR, DIST. RAICHUR
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI SANJAY A. PATIL, ADDL. SPP)
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME
No.52/2014 (MUDGAL POLICE STATION), PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE MUNCIF AND JMFC AT LINGASUGUR, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
11
ORDER
Though these matters are listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties and since the common question of law is involved in all these cases, they are taken up for final hearing and disposed of by this common order.
2. These petitions are filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the respective complaint registered/criminal proceedings initiated on the police report.
3. In the above cases, either the petitioners are charge sheeted or complaint was registered against them in respect of the offence for violation of the Minor and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'MMDR Act')/Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'KMMC Rules').
12
4. Petitioner in Crl.P.No.200131/2014 is charge sheeted for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC for illegally transporting sand (maram) from the revenue land and government land.
5. Petitioner in Crl.P.No.200206/2014 is charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 379 of IPC, Rules 43 and 44 of KMMC Rules, Sections 3(1) and 21 of MMDR Act and Section 15 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
6. Petitioner in Crl.P.No.200235/2014 is charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Rules 3, 42, 43 and 44 of KMMC Rules, Sections 4(1) and 4(1-A) of MMDR Act, Section 379 of IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908.
7. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.200236/2014 are charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Rules 3, 42, 43 and 44 of KMMC Rules, Sections 4(1) and 4(1-A) of MMDR 13 Act, Section 379 of IPC and Section 3 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908, for illegal mining.
8. In Crl.P.No.200340/2014, the respondent-Police have registered a case against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 379 of IPC on the allegation that they are illegally transporting sand from the river bank.
9. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.200368/2014 are being alleged for the offences punishable under Section 447 of IPC, Rules 3, 42, and 43 of KMMC Rules, Sections 4(1) and 4(1-A) of MMDR Act and Section 192(a) of Karnataka Land Revenue (Amendment) Act, 2007, for illegal mining for 20 years in government land etc.
10. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.200369/2014 are being alleged for the offences punishable under Section 447 of IPC, Rules 3, 42, and 43 of KMMC Rules, Sections 4(1) and 4(1-A) of MMDR Act and Section 192(a) of Karnataka Land 14 Revenue (Amendment) Act, 2007, for illegal mining in the agricultural land and government land.
11. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.200370/2014 are being alleged for the offences punishable under Section 447 of IPC, Rules 3, 42, and 43 of KMMC Rules, Sections 4(1) and 4(1-A) of MMDR Act and Section 192(a) of Karnataka Land Revenue (Amendment) Act, 2007, for illegal mining for 15 years in the agricultural land and government land.
12. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.200371/2014 are being alleged for the offences punishable under Section 447 of IPC, Rules 3, 42, and 43 of KMMC Rules, Sections 4(1) and 4(1-A) of MMDR Act and Section 192(a) of Karnataka Land Revenue (Amendment) Act, 2007, for illegal mining for 14 years in the agricultural land and government land.
13. Petitioners in Crl.P.No.200372/2014 are being alleged for the offences punishable under Sections 379 and 420 of IPC, Rules 3, 42, and 43 of KMMC Rules and 15 Sections 4(1) and 4(1-A) of MMDR Act, for illegal mining in agricultural land etc.
14. Whatever be the violation of the act alleged to have been committed by the petitioners, the fact remains in all the cases that the allegation was in respect of the offence in respect of 'minor minerals' which is defined under Section 2(e) of the MMDR Act. In that view of the matter, petitioners herein would submit that the police had no authority to register a complaint in respect of the offence in violation of the MMDR Act. The complaint if any could be only in accordance with Section 22 of the MMDR Act. The offences being non-cognizable, the complaint ought to be filed in writing before the jurisdictional Court by a person authorized in this behalf by the State or Central Government. Even in cases where investigation is complete and charge sheet is filed, taking cognizance of the offences on the police report was vitiated and liable to be quashed. 16
15. In reply, Sri Sanjay A. Patil, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent/State though does not dispute the position of law that under MMDR Act for violation of the offence a private complaint by the authorized person before the Court is the only remedy, he would further submit that State is not barred from initiating criminal law into motion under the Indian Penal Code, Karnataka Land Revenue (amendment) Act, 2007 and Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, on a police report.
16. In the light of the above, I have examined the common question of law raised by the petitioners herein. Section 22 of MMDR Act which is under discussion before us reads as under:
"22. Cognizance of offences.- No court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any rules made thereunder except upon complaint in writing made by a 17 person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government."
The "complaint" referred to in the said Section is the one defined under Section 2(d) of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, statute requires a complaint for violation of any offence under the MMDR Act to be presented by any officer authorized so by the respective State or Central Government before the Magistrate. Deviation to the above mandatory provision is illegal and vitiates the entire proceedings itself. Since all the cases herein are registered by the Police in respect of the violation of the MMDR Act are vitiated and this Court needs to interfere by invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the complaint and the consequential proceedings.
17. Coming to the cognizance in respect of the offence for violation of the provisions of Environment 18 (Protection) Act, 1986. Section 19 of the Environment Act reads as under:
"19. Cognizance of offences: No court shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act except on a complaint made by -
(a) the Central Government or any authority or officer authorized in this behalf by that Government; or
(b) any person who has given notice of not less than sixty days, in the manner prescribed, of the alleged offence and of his intention to make a complaint, to the Central Government or the authority or officer authorised as aforesaid."
This provision since is in pari materia to Section 22 of the MMDR Act, it is needless to reiterate that it is only by way of private complaint to the Court by the authorized authority contemplated in either (a) or (b) of Section 19 and not by way of police report.
19
18. Though there is no statutory bar in respect of registration of cases by the police in respect of the offence under the provisions of IPC and the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, it cannot be overlooked that these provisions are invoked in view of the offences committed mainly in respect of violation of the offence under the MMDR Act, and when the special statute is available to deal with the offence, State could not have proceeded under the guise of general statute of IPC and the offence under the Karnataka Land Revenue Act which is ancillary to the main offence alleged under MMDR Act. The complaint cannot survive if the offence under MMDR Act is not duly complained to the Court. In that view of the matter, interference of the Court is called for in all the above cases to prevent the abuse of law under the jurisdiction of Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, petitions are allowed. The proceedings in Crime No.141/2012 of Devadurga Police Station pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC at Devadurga, Crime 20 No.98/2012 of Mudgal Police Station, pending on the file of JMFC, Lingasugur, in Crime No.90/2009 of Mudgal Police Station, pending on the file of Principal Sessions Judge, Raichur, in Crime No.94/2010 of Mudgal Police Station, pending on the file of the District and Sessions Judge at Raichur, in Crime No.357/2013 of Lingasugur Police Station, pending on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC, Lingasugur, in Crime No.48/2014 of Mudgal Police Station, pending on the file of Muncif and JMFC at Lingasugur, in Crime No.46/2014 of Mudgal Police Station, pending on the file of Muncif and JMFC at Lingasugur, in Crime No.47/2014 of Mudgal Police Station, pending on the file of Muncif and JMFC at Lingasugur, in Crime No.46/2014 of Maski Police Station, pending on the file of Muncif and JMFC at Lingasugur and in Crime No.52/2014 of Mudgal Police Station, pending on the file of Muncif and JMFC at LINgasugur, are quashed.
21
However, liberty is reserved to the State to proceed in accordance with law if advised in respect of the offences alleged in the respective cases.
Sd/-
JUDGE NB*