ANJANI KUMAR MISHRA, VIVEK KUMAR SINGH
Maa Vaishno Traders – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant writ petition seeks quashing of the FIR dated 21.05.2023 giving rise to Case Crime No.177 of 2023, under Sections 379 I.P.C. & Sections 3(1), 58, 72(1) of the U.P. Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 2021, Sections 4, 21 of Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act 1957 and Sections 3, 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 at Police Station Sarai Akil, District Kaushambi.
3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that no offence is disclosed from the allegations in the FIR.
4. It is next contended that no mining was being carried out on the spot at the time of the surprise inspection carried out by the S.D.M., Chail, the Circle Officer, Chail and the Mining Officer, Chail. In any case, the offences are compoundable. Moreover, Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1957”) clearly provides that “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 authorised in this behal
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.