RAMESH SHIVALINGAPPA PATIL Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the arguments of the petitioner's counsel and the HCGP for respondent State.

(2.) The factual matrix of this case is that on 28.5.2018, at about 8.30 p.m. , the complainant on receiving credible information about a person illegally transporting sand in tractor trailer from Shirahatti towards Balawad, the complainant along with staff and panchas, at 8.45 p.m. proceeded towards the spot, and while one tractor and trailer was coming from Shirahatti towards Balawad, they intercepted and stopped the vehicle, the driver of the vehicle ran away. On enquiry it was ascertained that without having any pass or permit the driver and owner of the vehicle were involved in illegal sand mining and they; found that the tractor bearing No.KA-23/TA- 5537 attached with trailer bearing No.00378 without registration number was loaded with brass sand and hence he seized the tractor trailer along with sand. Thereafter, a case has been registered for the offence punishable under section 379 of IPC and under sections 4(1) , 4(1A) , 21 of Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act, and Rules 3, 32, 34 of KMMC Rules, 1994.

(3.) The main contention of the petitioner in this case is that he has not committed any offence as alleged against him and there is a bar under Section 22 of MMDR Act, 1957 and KMMC Rules and the complainant suo moto registered the case and invoked the offences under the MMRD Act and Rules. The counsel also relied upon the judgment reported in a case between State of Delhi vs. State of Gujarat, 2015 AIR(SC) 75 and Another wi th Malubhai Shalabhai Rabari & Others vs. State of Gujarat & Others wi th Kalubhai Khachar vs. State of Gujarat & Another, wherein it is held that there is bar to take cognizance and only on a private complaint filed by the authorized officer, the Court can take cognizance. Hence, the initiation of proceedings is liable to be quashed.