PURAN MAL AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 1.8.2008 passed by Sri S. K. Choudhary, learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in G.R. No. 573 of 2007 arising out of Mango P.S. Case No. 72 of 2007, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C., has been rejected by the Court below.

(3.) The petitioner has been made accused in Mango P.S. Case No. 72 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. No. 573 of 2007 in view of the fact that a raid was conducted at the shop of the petitioner by the officials of Mango Notified Area Committee and they found that plastic carry bags having the thickness less than 20 microns were being sold in the shop, and accordingly, it was found that the petitioner had violated Rules 4 & 8 of The Plastics Manufacture, Sale and Usage Rules, 1999 and accordingly, had committed the offence under Section 15 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and the FIR was lodged by the aforesaid officials before the Mango police station. It appears that upon investigation of the case, charge sheet was filed against the petitioner and cognizance was also taken. Subsequently, the petitioner filed the application in the Court below for discharge, taking the point that cognizance was taken in violation of Section 19 of the Environment (Protection) Act, wherein, cognizance of the offence is barred except on a complaint by the authorised person. In support of his contention, the petitioner had also placed reliance upon a decision of this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 701 of 2006. The Court below, however, rejected the application filed by the petitioner, stating that the cognizance had already been taken against the petitioner.