Febin Shan vs. Sub Inspector Of Police
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R Petitioner is the accused in S.T.No. 739 of 2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Payannur. He is alleged to have committed the offence under section 21(1) of the Mining and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act. The proceedings are sought to be quashed on the ground that it was illegal for the trail court take cognizance of the offence on a police report.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on a report filed by the police. Section 22 of the Mining and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act provides that cognizance can be taken only upon a complaint in writing made by a authorised person. So the order taking cognizance is illegal. In the result, this Crl.M.C is allowed. The proceedings in S.T.No. 739 of 2018 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Payannur are quashed. This is not impediment for the authoirsed officer to file a complaint. K.ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE SMA APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S ANNEXURES :- ANNEXURE A1OF THE GST REGISTRATION ISSUED M/SSHA TRADERS AND MINERALS. ANNEXURE A2OF THE TRANSIT PASS ISSUED BYT HE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF MINING AND GEOLOGY, ANDHRA PRADESH DATED 10/01/2018 ANNEXURE A3OF THE E-WAY BILL GENERATED FOR TRANSPORTATION OF KERALA. ANNEXURE A4OF G.O(P) 772015/ID DATED 5/06/2015 PUBLISHED VISE S.R.O NO.375/2015 PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNEMNT ANNEXURE A5OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CRIME NO. 76/2018 REGISTERED BYT HE PAYYANNUR POLICE RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :- NIL //// PA TO JUDGE SMA
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.