Back
SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Ikrar Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjay Kumar Singh, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no. 1 and perused the record.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge-sheet dated 24.11.2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 353 of 2019, cognizance order dated 30.09.2020 and proceedings of Case No. 4362 of 2020 (State v. Ikrar Khan and another), under Sections 379 , 411 I.P.C., Sections 3/57 of The Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963 and Sections 4/21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act 1957 Police Station Sarai Akil, District Kaushambi pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi.
3. The issue involved in the matter lies in a very narrow compass. The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that vide impugned order dated 30.09.2020, cognizance has been taken against the applicants under Sections 3/57 of The Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, Sections 4/21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and Sections 379 , 411 I.P.C. to face trial, whereas, the Magistrate concerned was n
Cognizance of offences under the Mines and Minerals Act requires a complaint from authorized personnel; proceeding based on an FIR is not valid.
Police lack authority to investigate under the Mines and Minerals Act without a complaint from an authorized person, reaffirming the necessity of compliance with statutory provisions.
Cognizability of offences under different Acts and Rules determines the permissibility of lodging an FIR and quashing the same.
Cognizance for offences under mining statutes requires a written complaint by an authorized officer; IPC cognizance valid if essential theft elements are met.
The court clarified that cognizance under mining regulations requires an authorized complaint, while extortion allegations under IPC can proceed without such a complaint.
The special law prevails over general law in cases of conflict, preventing prosecution based on a police report under specific statutory provisions.
Bar under sub-section (2) of Section 23-A shall not affect any proceedings for the offences under IPC, such as, Section 379 and 414 IPC, which shall proceed further in accordance with law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
