MARUTHI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. SPP for respondent.

(2.) THE petitioners in these two petitions have sought for quashing the case registered in Crime No.208/2012 of Shahapur police station and to discharge them. The petitioners who claim to be the drivers of the lorry were transporting sand illegally from Krishna River Basin. In this regard, one Sri.N.S.Mukandappanavar, Senior Geologist filed a complaint before Shahapur police for illegal mining and transportation of the sand and also had directed them to stop such illegal transport. As per the complaint, it is stated that one Vishwanatha Reddy and Vaarada Nagabhushana are misusing the seal of the authority and certifying forged documents.

(3.) CHALLENGING the filing of FIR against the petitioners on the instigation of persons and stating as per Section 22 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 ('MMDR' for short), the complaint ought to have been filed as per Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate, therefore, registration of FIR by the police is bad in law and as such, there is violation of procedure in not filing the complaint before the Magistrate directly and rather the case was registered before the police which is in violation of Section 22 of MMDR Act and that Section 2(d) of Cr.P.C. contemplates the complaint to be filed by the authorized person orally or in writing and registration of FIR is not contemplated as it is bad in law, counsel has sought for quashing of FIR and in support of his argument, he also relied upon an unreported decision of this Court in Crl.P.No.15145/2012 dated 01.02.2013 to contend that the case registered under the IPC has to be quashed.