2019 Supreme(Kar) 216

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (DHARWAD BENCH)
H.P. SANDESH, J.
Ravi @ Ravindra - Appellant
Versus
S.N. Naik - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 101274, 101815, 101986, 102023, 102059, 102060, 102061, 102062, 102107, 102122, 102126, 102281 of 2018
Decided On : 06-02-2019

The police can register cases for offences under a special enactment and also under the IPC. However, the Court cannot take cognizance of such offences on the basis of a police report. The authorized person under the special enactment can file a complaint after the registration of the case by the police. The Court can take cognizance of such complaint.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL - MINOR MINERALS (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1957 - KARNATAKA MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1994 - INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 - REGISTRATION OF CASES - JURISDICTION - WHETHER POLICE CAN REGISTER CASES FOR OFFENCES UNDER THE ACT AND RULES AND ALSO UNDER THE IPC - WHETHER THE COURT CAN TAKE COGNIZANCE OF SUCH OFFENCES ON THE BASIS OF A POLICE REPORT - WHETHER THE AUTHORIZED PERSON UNDER SECTION 22 OF THE ACT CAN FILE A COMPLAINT AFTER THE REGISTRATION OF THE CASE BY THE POLICE - WHETHER THE COURT CAN TAKE COGNIZANCE OF SUCH COMPLAINT - HELD, YES - THE POLICE CAN REGISTER CASES FOR OFFENCES UNDER THE ACT AND RULES AND ALSO UNDER THE IPC - THE COURT CANNOT TAKE COGNIZANCE OF SUCH OFFENCES ON THE BASIS OF A POLICE REPORT - THE AUTHORIZED PERSON UNDER SECTION 22 OF THE ACT CAN FILE A COMPLAINT AFTER THE REGISTRATION OF THE CASE BY THE POLICE - THE COURT CAN TAKE COGNIZANCE OF SUCH COMPLAINT.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, who were accused of offences under the Minor Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (the Act), the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 (the Rules), and the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (the IPC), filed petitions challenging the registration of cases against them for both the Act and the IPC offences. They contended that the police had no authority to register a complaint in respect of the said offences and that the complaint could be filed only in accordance with Section 22 of the Act, which required a formal complaint by a competent person authorized in this behalf. The petitioners also argued that the Court below had entertained the complaint even for the offences under the special enactment and hence the proceedings were liable to be quashed.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the police had the authority to register cases for offences under the Act and Rules and also under the IPC. However, the Court cannot take cognizance of such offences on the basis of a police report. The authorized person under Section 22 of the Act can file a complaint after the registration of the case by the police. The Court can take cognizance of such complaint.

Issues: 1. Whether the police can register cases for offences under the Act and Rules and also under the IPC? 2. Whether the Court can take cognizance of such offences on the basis of a police report? 3. Whether the authorized person under Section 22 of the Act can file a complaint after the registration of the case by the police? 4. Whether the Court can take cognizance of such complaint?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the police can register cases for offences under the Act and Rules and also under the IPC because the offences under the Act are cognizable offences and the police have the power to investigate cognizable offences under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the CrPC). 2. The Court held that the Court cannot take cognizance of such offences on the basis of a police report because Section 22 of the Act prohibits the Court from taking cognizance of any offence punishable under the Act except upon a complaint in writing made by a person authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government. 3. The Court held that the authorized person under Section 22 of the Act can file a complaint after the registration of the case by the police because there is no bar to the authorized person filing a complaint after the registration of the case by the police. 4. The Court held that the Court can take cognizance of such complaint because Section 22 of the Act empowers the Court to take cognizance of offences punishable under the Act upon a complaint in writing made by a person authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government.

Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petitions filed by the petitioners.