SHAIKH YUNUS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicants are being prosecuted vide R.C.C. No. 360 of 2010 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Paithan, on the basis of a police report alleging that they have committed an offence punishable under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with section 34 of IPC, as also the offences punishable under section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. By the present application, the applicants pray that by exercising the inherent powers of this Court, the proceedings of the said case be quashed.

(2.) THE prosecution case is in brief as follows :

(3.) THOUGH a number of contentions including that there is no prima facie case of the alleged offences against the applicants have been raised, the main contention raised on behalf of the applicants is that their prosecution is not maintainable in view of the provisions of section 22 of the said Act. It is submitted that the cognizance of the offences under the said Act could be taken only on a complaint made by a person duly authorized in that behalf by the Central Government or the State Government. It is submitted that since the applicants are not being prosecuted on the basis of any complaint lodged by any such authorized person, the cognizance of the alleged offences under the said Act could not have been taken. It is also submitted that the accusation of the applicants having committed an offence punishable under section 379 of IPC is unsustainable. It is submitted that there is no material to support the allegations of theft but, what is emphatically submitted is that in any case, when the alleged acts are covered by a special provision i.e. the provisions of the said Act, the question of application of general provisions under IPC, was ruled out.