V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE Order in Crl M. P. No. 430/94 in STC No. 143/93 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Razole, dated 12-4-1994 dropping the proceedings against the respondents-accused is assailed by the complainant in this appeal.

( 2 ) THE facts in brief are as under : The Inspector of Mines having been appointed by the Central Government purportedly under Section 5 (1) of the Mines Act, 1952, filed a complaint against the respondents herein alleging that there was a blow out in the oil well at Komarada-I E-1400-17 Rig. , on 20-3-1993 at about 10. 30 a. m. that it was inspected by Sri A. K. Megharaj, Deputy Director of Mines Safety (also an Inspector of Mines) on 3rd, 4th 23rd and 24/04/1993, and Sri S. Venkataraman, Deputy Director of Mines Safety (Mechanical) (also an Inspector of Mines) on 3/04/1993 and that the above inspections revealed the contravention of Regulation 44 of the Oil and Mines Regulations, 1984. The relevant portion of the report is extracted below-- "in contravention of Regulation 44 of the Oil Mines Regulations, 1984, the accused persons did not subject the blow out preventer assembly including its control valves, connection pipes and spacers etc. . . . tested to the rated pressure of the assembly or the rated pressure of the casting pipe on which it is mounted, whichever is less, soon after its initial installation, re-installation, following repair and before drilling out cement plug from the string of casing. "

( 3 ) ON that basis, the complainant alleged that the respondents herein have failed in their duties as envisaged under Section 18 of the Mines Act, 1952 and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 73 of the Mines Act, 1952.

( 4 ) THE complaint was taken on file by the learned Magistrate as STC. No. 143/93 and process was issued to the respondents. They entered appearance and filed a petition Crl. M. P. No. 430/94 purportedly under Sections 255 and 482 Cr. P. C. for dropping the proceedings on two grounds namely (1) that they are public servants within the meaning of Section 21 IPC and that sanction for prosecution under Section 197 Cr. P. C. was not obtained and (2) that the respondents have acted in good faith in discharging their official duties and hence Section 28 of the Mines Act is a bar. The learned Magistrate held that the respondents are not public servants inasmuch as they are in the service of Oil and Natural Gas Commission which is a non-governmental autonomous body and hence no sanction under Section 197 Cr. P. C. is required. He has, however, accepted the second ground and held that the acts attributed to the respondents were performed in good faith as defined in the General Clauses Act. Thus, the petition filed by them has been allowed.

( 5 ) SINCE the above order is passed under Section 255 Cr. P. C. and tantamounts to an order of acquittal, this appeal is preferred by the complainant.

( 6 ) THE learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government appearing for the appellant strenuously contended that the learned Magistrate should not have thrown out the complaint at the threshold and that an order of acquittal as contemplated by Section 255 Cr. P. C. without recording the evidence of prosecution and following the procedure laid down in Chapter XX of Cr. P. C. is illegal and liable to be set aside. He filed a copy of the enquiry report submitted by Sri Ashok Kumar Megharaj, Deputy Director of Mines Safety and argued that on the recommendations of the above enquiry officer, the complaint was filed. He urged that the impugned order may be set aside and the complaint may be remitted to the learned Magistrate for disposal in accordance with law.

( 7 ) SRI K. Venkata Rao, learned Counsel for the respondents on the other hand contended that it is open to the Magistrate to look into the allegations in the complaint and to satisfy himself whether the offence alleged is made out or not and to drop the proceedings at any stage if no offence i

Click Here to Read the rest of this document