ASHOK BHUSHAN, M.R.SHAH
Jayant – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.R. SHAH, J.
Leave granted.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order dated 11.05.2020 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore in M.Cr.C No. 49338/2019 and M.Cr.C. No. 49972/2019, the original petitioner as well as the State of Madhya Pradesh have preferred the present appeals.
By the impugned common judgment and order, the High Court has dismissed the aforesaid applications filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the respective FIRs for the offences under Sections 379 and 414, IPC, Sections 4/21 of the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MMDR Act’) and under Rule 18 of the M.P. Minerals (Prevention of illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘2006 Rules’).
3. The facts in nutshell are as under:
On a surprise inspection, the respective Mining Inspectors checked the tractor/trolleys of the private appellants along with the minor mineral (sand/storage/yellow soil etc.) loaded in them. They handed over the tractor/tr
State (NCT of Delhi) v. Sanjay
Kanwar Pal Singh v. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No. 1920 of 2019, decided on December 18
Krishna Pillai v. T.A. Rajendran
A.R. Antulay v. Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak
Manohar M. Galani v. Ashok N. Advani (1999) 8 SCC 737 – Relied [Para 9.2]
S.K. Sinha, Chief Enforcement Officer v. Videocon International Limited
Fakhruddin Ahmad v. State of Uttaranchal
Subramanian Swamy v. Manmohan Singh
Anil Kumar v. M.K. Aiyappa (2013) 10 SCC 705 – Relied [Para 9.6]
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.