The High Court of Kerala held that the Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance of offences under the Sand Act as Sec. 25 mandates a complaint by a specific authority. The Criminal M.C. allowing quashing was allowed to the extent of quashing the proceedings.
Cr.M.C. allowed; proceedings in C.C. No. 696/2006 quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/15TH BHADRA 1934
Crl.MC.No. 2354 of 2006 ( )
CC.696/2006 of J.M.F.C.-I,PATHANAMTHITTA
PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NOS. 1 TO 4 :-
1. ANIL KOSHY, S/O.T.K.KOSHY,
2. RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, S/O.SIVARAMA PILLAI, SREERAMANILAYAM VEEDU, KANNAMANGALAM MURI
3. THANKAMMA MARTIN, W/O.MARTIN,
4. RAJASEKHARA KURUP, S/O.RAMAKRISHNA KURUP SIVASAILAM VEEDU, THOTTAKKONAM MURI PANTHALAM VILLAGE.
BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHIFF
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE :-
1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA.
2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
jvt
CRL.M.C.No.2354/2006
APPENDIX
| Petitioner's | Exhibits | :- | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annexure A1 | :- Copy | of | the Final Report. |
| Annexure A2 | :- Copy | of | the summons dated 12.6.2006. |
| Annexure A3 2005. |
:- Copy | of | the Receipt No.46 dated 28-10- |
| Annexure A4 2005. |
:- Copy | of | the Receipt No.33 dated 25-10- |
| Annexure A5 2005. |
:- Copy | of | the Receipt No.32 dated 25-10- |
| Annexure A6 dated 3-2-200 |
:- Copy 6 of the Di |
of str |
the proceedings No.C9-39570/2005 ict Collector, Pathanamthitta. |
| Annexure A7 | :- Copy | of | the license No.KQN 153/01-02. |
| Annexure A8 | :- Copy | of | the license No.KQN 154/01-02. |
| Annexure A9 | :- Copy | of | the license No.KQN 156/01-02. |
| Annexure A10 | :- Copy | of | the license No.KQN 5460/01-02. |
| Annexure A11 by this Honou |
:- Copy rable Court |
of , C |
the order dated 15-3-2006 passed rl.M.C.No.380 of 2006. |
| Annexure A12 3-12-2005 of |
:- Copy the Distric |
of t C |
proceedings No.D9-20808/05 dated ollector, Pathanamthitta. |
| Annexure A13 | :- Cop | y | of the judgment dated 1-3-2006 |
| passed by thi | s Honourabl | e C | ourt in W.P.(C) No.3305 of 2006. |
Annexure A14 :- Copy of the order dated 26-7-2006 passed by this Honourable Court in Crl.M.A.No.3992 of 2006 in Crl.MC No.2120 of 2006.
Respondent's Exhibits :- NIL.
//True Copy//
P.A. to Judge
N.K.BALAKRISHNAN, J.
Crl.M.C. No.2354 of 2006
-----------------------------------Dated this the 6th day of September 2012
O R D E R
Petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.696/2006 of J.F.C.M.-I, Pathanamthitta. The cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate based on the final report filed by the police under Sec.173(2) Cr.P.C. alleging offences punishable under Secs.20, 21 and 23 of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001 (for short, “Sand Act”). Sec.25 of the Sand Act reads :
“No court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act, except upon a complaint in writing made by a person authorised in this behalf by the Government or the District Collector or a Geologist of the Department of Mining and Geology”
In view of the specific bar under Sec.25 of the Act and also in the light of the decisions on that point, I hold that the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is liable to be
Crl.M.C. No.2354 of 2006
-: 2 :-
quashed.
In the result, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. The proceedings taken by the learned Magistrate in C.C.No.696/2006 is quashed. It is made clear that this does not preclude the competent authorities from filing a complaint against the accused in respect of the very same Act subject to the limitation prescribed for filing a complaint. (See Secs.468 and 473 Cr.P.C.).
N.K.BALAKRISHNAN,
Jvt
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Magistrate had jurisdiction to take cognizance of an offence under the Sand Act without a complaint.
Whether the bar under Sec. 25 of the Sand Act necessitates quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated by the Magistrate.
Whether quashing of the proceedings precludes competent authorities from filing a fresh complaint.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Anil Koshy and others
Sub Inspector of Police, Pathanamthitta
State of Kerala
N.K. Balakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
