VISHALBHAI RAMESHBHAI KHURANA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of petitions involves similar questions of law though individual facts are slightly different. They, therefore, are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Facts may be noticed from Criminal Misc. Application No.5230 of 2010. In the said petition, the petitioners-original accused have challenged the legality and validity of criminal complaint bearing C.R.No.326/08 filed before Bhuj Taluka Police Station by Geologist of the State Government. In the complaint, it is stated that from the letter of the Mamlatdar it was learnt that in the sim of village Angiya, mineral (black trap) was being excavated by M.S.Khurana Engineering Company. Upon spot inspection, one JCB Machine and a dumper loaded with black-trap were found at the spot which were seized by the Police. Supervisor of the Company was present. His statement and the statement of one labourer were recorded. Statement of driver of the dumper was also recorded. They could not produce necessary licence for such mining. It was found that such illegal mining was being carried out at three different places. The Geologist estimated total cost of illegal mining of minerals at Rs.21,74,040/-. He, therefore, lodged the said complaint with the police for alleged commission of offence under section 379 read with section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 21(1), 21(2), 21(3) and 21(5) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act") and under the provisions of the Gujarat Mineral (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"). Though the petition was filed at the stage when the investigation was not yet completed, it appears that subsequently, the police has completed the investigation and filed chargesheet before the Magistrate. The Magistrate, however, has not formally taken cognizance of the offence.

(3.) For rest of the petitions, it would not be necessary to take detailed account of the allegations in the complaint. However, bare facts may be noticed.