When a special legislation with specific provisions exists, it prevails over the general law, and the penal provisions of the Indian Penal Code may not be warranted.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR, in connection with Chirkunda (Panchet) P.S. Case No. 270 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 4644 of 2013, registered for the offence under Sections 288, 337, 338, 304 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned CJM, Dhanbad.

3. The prosecution case arises out of the self statement of Sub Inspector Umesh Kumar Thakur, the officer Incharge, Panchet O.P under Chirkunda P.S recorded by the Chirkunda (Panchet) OP on 12.11.2013 in respect to an accident which had occurred in Sushil Incline of Basanti Mata Colliery under CV Area of M/s BCCL at or about 11.15 AM on 11.11.2013 resulting in death of 4 persons.

The prosecution case in brief is that on 11.11.2013 at about 12.30 noon, the informant received information on telephone from a CISF Personnel that a coal roof in Sushil Incline of Basanti Mata Colliery has fallen down in which some workmen have sustained injuries while others lying under the fallen roof.

The informant is alleged to have made necessary entries in the Station diary and after informing senior executives visited the place of occurrence along with police force. The informant came to learn that due to the roof fall at the 16" level 21 deep, GP (top) Seam of Sushil Incline have been trapped under the fallen roof while 2 workmen namely Md. Quaim and Sukal Soren (Jr. Overman) have sustained injuries and after giving first aid have been referred to the Central Hospital for better treatment.

It has also been alleged that on receiving information of such occurrence villagers assembled outside the Sushil Incline and therefore request was made for sending additional force and police officers. It has also been alleged that the informant visited the place of occurrence accompanied by the Rescue Team an found 2 dead bodies. Upon enquiry the informant came to learn that the said mine had remained closed since 2009 and had reopened recently on 16.07.2013 on permission being granted by the Director General of Mines Safety.

The informant has alleged that depillaring work was in progress at the place of occurrence and due to lack of proper support during the exit of SDL Machine roof had fallen down. The workers present at the spot reveled that on account of less wooden support for the roof the accident took place. It has also been stated that in the mining Sirdar's Daily Mines Inspection Report such fact had been mentioned but no adequate safety measures were taken nor wooden support were increased.

It has further been alleged that 4 dead bodies of employees namely Arup Chatterjee, Manager, Harilal, Underground Trammer, Sita Ram Manjhi, Explosive Carrier and Littu Sahu, roof wielding Mazdoor were recovered from the place of occurrence by the Rescue Team and the bodies were identified from the clothes, lamp number etc.

On the basis of the statement of Sri Umesh Kumar Thakur, Chirkunda (Panchet) OP registered the same as Chirkunda (Panchet) P.S Case No. 270/2013 u/s 288, 337, 338, 304 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Mr. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the office of the Director General of Mines Safety, Dhanbad immediately took up enquiry for the causes relating to fatal accident of 11.11.2013 and a notice to that effect was issued by the Director, Mines Safety, Area No. 2, Dhanbad. He further submits that for the same incident, a case under the Mines Act has also been registered in the year 2014 itself, which was numbered as C.M.A. Case No. 36 of 2014. He further submits that when the Special Act is there, the case lodged under the Penal Sections of IPC is unwarranted. He draws the attention of the court to Annexures- 3 and 4, which are the letters of the Government of India and addressed to the Chief Secretaries of the States, whereby they have been requested that under the IPC Sections cases may