Point of Law: When exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, the High Court could not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it the accusation would not be sustained. To put it clear, it is the function of the trial Judge to do so. The Court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of its power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. If the allegations set out in the complaint do not constitute offence of which cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate, it is open to the High Court to quash the same in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, it is not necessary that there should be meticulous analysis of the case before the trial to find out whether the case would end in conviction or acquittal

JUDGMENT :

1. The instant petition under Section 482/483 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed against order dated 11.11.2019 passed by Special Judicial Magistrate (Pollution)/CBI, Lucknow in Complaint Case No.774 of 1989 (Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Lucknow v. M/S Daurala Sugar Works (Distillery Division) and Ors.) rejecting the application of the petitioners for their discharge under Section 245 of the Cr.P.C. from the prosecution lodged by the Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board, Lucknow under Section 44 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred as 'Act of 1974') and the consequential confirming order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Lucknow dated 17.07.2020 in Criminal Revision No.688 of 2019 (M/S Daurala Sugar Works (Distillery Division) and Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr.) dismissing the criminal revision preferred by the petitioners under Section 397 of the Cr.P.C.

2. Brief facts as borne out from the petition are as under:-

(i) M/s Daurala Sugar Works (Distillery Division) is owned by M/s DCM Limited, Delhi having its registered Office at Kanchenjunga Building, 18, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. The Distillery was installed in the year 1943. There is rearrangement of Company 'DCM Limited' along with three other Companies, i.e., DCM Industries Limited, DCM Shriram Industries Limited and Shriram Industrial Enterprises Limited, approved by Delhi High Court vide order dated 16.04.1990 under Section 391-394 of Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1956"). Daurala Sugar Works, Daurala is now a unit of M/s DCM Shriram Industries Limited, New Delhi with effect from 01.04.1990.

(ii) Since installation of Distillery, the Trade Effluent discharged by it, is used to be consumed by nearby growers to irrigate their fields and for that purpose petitioner/company constructed a channel running in about five kilometers. This channel joins a drain (sewer) known as kali Nadi which is neither a river nor watercourse nor stream.

(iii) The Parliament enacted Act, 1974 and State of U.P. framed Rules, namely U.P. Water (Consent for Discharge of Sewage and Trade Effluent) Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules of 1981"). It constituted 'Board' for the purpose of giving effect to provisions of Act of 1974 and Rules framed by State Government. Sections 25 and 26 of Act of 1974 required a running Industry to obtain consent from Board for discharging 'Trade Effluent' in a stream or well or sewer or on land. State Government issued Notification dated 21.09.1981 specifying 31.12.1981 as the date on or before which consent application should be filed by existing industries. Board vide Notification dated 06.04.1983 laid down effluent standards for discharge in stream and on land fixing BOD level at 100 MG per liter for existing Distilleries.

(iv) For the purpose of setting up "Effluent Treatment Plant", the petitioners made an application to Collector on 13.07.1981 requesting for allotment of 31.38 acres land in Village Daurala and Machri, adjacent to petitioner-Distillery which was taken by State Government under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as "Act of 1960"). Correspondence continued but petitioners could not get land as desired for setting up "Effluent Treatment Plant" whereupon the petitioners made its own efforts with individual farmers and could get land in June 1984 and June 1985 measuring 18.43 acres. The Board passed an order rejecting the application of petitioners for consent vide order dated 07.05.1983 and 16.08.1984. The petitioners again moved an application on 09.03.1985 to the Board requesting for grant of consent in which it also mentioned a time bound programme for setting up "Effluent Treatment Plant". The Board again declined consent vide order dated 25.06.1985/10.07.1985. The petitioner, however was permitted to continue on the plant of setting up "Effluent Treatment Plan".

(v) Board issued a notice to the