Criminal proceedings initiated without required chairman approval render the complaint a nullity, thereby precluding judicial cognizance under the Air Act.

ORDER :

J.M.KHAZI, J.

Petitioner who is the sole accused has filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C, with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.687/2015 (arising out of PCR.No.196/2013) on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC, Hoskote, for the offences punishable under Sections 21 , 22 and 37 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 ('Air act' for short) in respect of petitioner's stone crusher unit M/s Bharat Stone Crushers (formerly known as Shashank stones).

2. For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

3. Respondent No.6/complainant filed a private complaint alleging that it is a statutory body constituted under Section 4 of the Air Act Board is empowered to perform the powers and functions assigned to it under the said act, such as to control and regulate the emission of air pollutants into the atmosphere in the air pollution control area declared by the Karnataka state. The entire Karnataka State is declared as air pollution control area, as per Notification dated 30.05.1988.

3.1 Accused is carrying on the stone, crushing activities in the name and style of M/s Bharat construction company at survey number 31, Guttahalli village, Jagnahalli Hobli, within the jurisdiction of the trial Court. Accused was issued with the consent for operation for discharge of emission under the Air Act vide order dated 18.02.2012 valid from 01.07.2009 to 06.03.2012. Again, the consent was extended from 06.03.2012 to 30.06.2012 vide order dated 30.06.2012.

3.2. While operating the industrial plant, it was stipulated among other conditions that the accused shall have to install the Chimney at out let to the Jaw crusher, vibratory screen, belt conveyors system and that the discharge of emission from the premises of accused shall pass through the stack/Chimney/outlet and that the officers of the Board shall be free to collect the samples at any time as per the Air Act and Rules made there under and the accused shall provide air pollution control measures as indicated in Annexures-A and B, so that the discharge of emission shall not exceed the standard prescribed. It was also stipulated as a condition that 120 days before the expiry of the said consent, accused shall apply and obtain consent for further period.

3.3. In view of the orders passed by the Hon'ble supreme Court in Crl.A.No.7041-43/2001 dated 08.04.2009, order of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.6611/2011 dated 18.02.2011 and W.P.No.15576- 77/2010 dated 21.02.2011, the complainant/ Board issued closure order in exercise of powers under Section 31A of Air Act r/w Rules 20A of Air Rules 1993, directing accused to close down the operations and BECSOM officials were directed to stop power supply through communication dated 29.08.2012.

3.4 Accused was required to obtain consent for operation for further period after 30.06.2012 and also required to comply with above conditions. Despite the closure order, accused has continued to operate the plant in violation of the provision of the Air Act and thereby committed the offences punishable under Section 37 of Air Act. This violation was noticed by Shri Bhaskar H G, AEO, Regional Officer, Hoskote, during inspection on 17.12.2012. He has drawn mahazar and submitted report. He has also noted that despite closure order BECSOM has not stopped power supply.

3.5 By virtue of Section 15 of the Air Act, Board has delegated power authorizing the complainant to file the complainant vide Board meeting dated 13.02.2007 and hence, the complaint.

4. Petitioner i