SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Ker) 687

ALEXANDER THOMAS
SANAL E. ISSAC – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: SRI. P.M. ZIRAJ
For the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GITHESH R.

ORDER :

The prayer in this Crl. M.C is to quash the impugned Anx-2 final report/charge sheet filed in the impugned Anx-1 F.I.R in Crime No.542/2014 of Chingavanam Police Station registered for offences u/s 4 (1)(A) r/w section 21(1) of the Mines and Mineral Development and Regulation Act (MMDR Act) 1957 and Section 3(1) r/w 181 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioner is accused No.3 in the aforestated impugned criminal proceedings. The main contention urged by the petitioner is that in view of the specific mandate of the provisions contained in Sec.22 of the MMDR Act, cognizance for the offences envisaged in that act can be taken only on the basis of a complaint in writing of the authorized officer and therefore it is contended that no cognizance could be taken on the basis of a final report/charge sheet/police report as has been done in the instant case. It is the indisputable case that the FIR in question has been registered by the police for the offences under MMDR Act which has led to the impugned Anx.2 final report/charge sheet. The Supreme Court in the case State of N.C.T of Delhi v. Sanjay [2014 (3) KLT 1033 (SC)] that no cognizance can be lawfully taken in respect of the o







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top