The requirement of a complaint by an authorized person for taking cognizance of the offense under the M.M.D.R. Act and the precedence of special legislation over the general punishment prescribed under the Penal Code.

D.K. Sinha, J.

1. The instant petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashment of the entire criminal proceeding pending as against the Petitioner including the order impugned dated 30.08.2010 by which the cognizance of the offence was taken under Section 21 of the M.M.D.R. Act, 1957 and under Sections 467/468/471/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code against several accused persons including the Petitioner in Gua (Barajamda) P.S. Case No. 28 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 231 of 2010. The Petitioner has been admitted to bail in B.A. No. 6079 of 2010 by this Court.

2. Initially, the F.I.R. was instituted against three named accused persons and two named suspects but the company of the Petitioner was not named even among the suspects. It was alleged that the challans earlier issued by the Mining Department for the transportation of iron ores were re-used by the accused persons and thereby committed forgery and also offence under M.M.D.R. Act.

3. With reference to item No. 4 of the written report presented by the informant Sub-Divisional Officer, Sadar, Chaibasa before the Officer-in-Charge, Barajamda Police Station, it was alleged that 3921.010 metric tonnes of iron ores were transported by Sara International Pvt. Ltd. on 19.02.2010 through a railway racks and statements of such transportation was presented before the railway, according to which, out of the challans vide serial No. 8447101 to 8447400 total 299 challans were found to be reused for sending consignment of iron ores to Apex Export, Barajamda on 11.04.2009 and the iron ores were re-sold by Apex Export to Bhushan Power and Steel and it could not be gathered as to whether any kind of consignment was sent or booked by Sara International to any other party or not. It was further alleged that Sara International was not holding any licence for railway siding at Barajamda Station but since the iron ores were stored on the railway siding without licence, it were seized by the informant.

4. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against the Petitioner also, who was the employee of Apex Export, Barajamda.

5. Learned Counsel Mr. Nilesh Kumar at the outset submitted that the informant Sub-Divisional Officer, Chaibasa was not a competent officer to launch prosecution by lodging an F.I.R. before the Officer-in-Charge, Barajamda Police Station under the M.M.D.R. Act. Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 speaks about the cognizance of the offence viz.,

No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any rules made thereunder except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorized in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government.

Admittedly, no authority letter could be produced by the informant S.D.O. for lodging an F.I.R. and that no complaint was filed before the C.J.M. by a competent officer against the Petitioner or any of the accused of the instant case.

6. Mr. Nilesh Kumar, learned Counsel, further submitted that in the meantime a notice was sent by the District Mining Officer, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa to M/s Apex Export i.e. employer of the Petitioner calling upon to deposit a sum of Rs. 19,60,505.00/-being the value of 3921.010 Metric tonnes of iron ores transported to the Bhushan Power and Steel after receiving it from M/s Sara International Pvt. Ltd. on 19.02.2010 and thereby offence was committed under Section 21(5) of the M.M.D.R. Act, 1957. The mining authority came out with proposal for composition of the offence under Section 23A of the Act calling upon to pay compensation by evaluating the iron ores @ Rs. 500/-per metric tonnes. It was further stated and cautioned in the said letter of the District Mining Officer that failing to pay the entire compensation amount, a proceeding for confiscation would be initiated by initiation of a certificate case. Pur