BIREN KUMAR SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole submission urged in this petition is for quashing of the criminal proceeding initiated under Section 4(i) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 read with Section -21(i) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Amendment Act, 1986 on the allegation that the Petitioner, who was previously a contractor under the South -Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Talcher had removed some sand unauthorisedly on the ground that the prosecution was barred by limitation prescribed under Section 468(2) Code of Criminal Procedure. The admitted facts according to the prosecution report is that the alleged occurrence took place on 18 -7 -1985 but the report it self was submitted on l8 -8 -1987 and cognizance of the offence was taken on 2 -9 -1987. It is also admitted that the maximum punishment impassable for the offence was one year at the time of the occurrence and hence the limitation for taking cognizance of the offence was one year from the date of commission of the offence. The period of limitation admittedly expired by 17th of July, 1986 and it is therefore urged that the Court could not have entertained the prosecution nor taken cognizance of the offence and that the prosecution is liable to be quashed.

(2.) THE submission of Mr. Misra is well sustained. The bar under Section 468 . Code of Criminal Procedure is that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence after the expiry of the period of limitation prescribed therein. Hence, initiation of the proceeding against the Petitioner was still -born.

(3.) IN the result, the Criminal Misc. Case is allowed and the cognizance is quashed.