YES MOOL CHAND GARG, J.

1. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR bearing No. 96/2008 dated 23.04.2008 registered at Police Station Alipur under Section 379/411/120B/34 IPC dated 23rd April, 2008 against the petitioner and others on the allegations that he was involved in illegal mining of sand from Yamuna Basin.

2. The FIR was registered by the police suo moto having come to know that some persons were removing and selling sand from the Yamuna Basin for the last ¾ days. On that basis on 22nd April, 2004 they committed a raid and visited the site where they found one dumper bearing Tata No. HR-69-1769 filled with the sand. The person who was driving the said dumper when asked to produce the documents failed to produce any document and rather told that he was behind illegal mining. At that time some other digging equipments were also found which were also taken into possession and the petitioner and some other persons were arrested.

3. It is also the case of the police that acts which are the basis of this FIR tantamount to illegal mining which is an offence under section 379/411 of IPC besides being a cognizable offence under Section 21(6) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and is also in violation of the orders of the Apex Court in M.C.Mehta Vs. Union of India.

4. According to the petitioner the registration of FIR in this case by the Police is illegal inasmuch as no offence was made out under Section 379/411/120-B/34 IPC in the facts of this case. It is submitted that offences if at all which could have been taken cognizance of would be under the provisions of the said Act. It is also submitted that regarding violation of the provisions of the said Act the cognizance can be taken only on the basis of a complaint which has to be filed under Section 22 of the said Act by an authorized officer. The aforesaid provision is reproduced hereunder: “Cognizance of Offence – No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any Rule made there under except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or by the State Government.”

From the reading of the said Section, it is clear that no FIR can be registered concerning violation of the provisions of the said Act. Once the legislature has provided a particular remedy then certainly by no stretch of imagination FIR can be registered.

5. It is also stated that if any person removes the sand/clay without the permission then royalty from the amount of the same can be recovered and that too by way of procedure prescribed under the provisions of the said Act. It is also submitted that the allegations concerning removal of the sand from the land which belongs to one Shri Lalit Yadav, who is the bhoomidar of the said land which forms part of Khasra No. 964, 965 and 966 situated in the revenue estate of Village Jhangola, Delhi who had the permission to remove the sand from his fields issued by the Competent Authority and the factum of the permission being granted for removal of the sand/clay is known to the public authorities also. The police in fact, was informed of these things by the owner of the land and also by other persons, who were arrested along with the petitioner. In fact, all such persons have been falsely implicated in the said case. Copy of the permission so granted by the competent authority has been filed along with the petition.

6. It has been submitted that in view of the aforesaid facts, the arrest of the petitioner is illegal and without the authority of law as no FIR could have been registered in this case. The petitioner has relied upon a Judgment delivered in Avtar Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported as AIR 1965 SC 666 and submitted that the said ratio of this judgment applies with full force to the facts of the