The special law prevails over general law in cases of conflict, preventing prosecution based on a police report under specific statutory provisions.

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 4 82 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the summoning order dated 11.08.2021 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur as well as proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2312 of 2021 (State v. Santosh Kumar Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 27 of 2021, under Section 188 of I.P.C. and Sections 4 /21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and sections 37, 39 Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Police Station-Ahraura, District-Mirzapur.

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 summoning order dated 11.08.2021, the applicant has been summoned under Section 188 of I.P.C., Sections 4 /21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and sections 37, 39 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 to face trial, whereas the Magistrate concerned was not empowered to take cognizance on the police report for the aforesaid alleged offence, because with regard to same, there is a procedure for filing complaint.

4. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the state submits that if the act of accused makes out a cognizable offence under Section 188 I.P.C. and under Section 21 of the MMDR Act 1957 as well as under sections 37 and 39 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, registration of F.I.R. under those enactments is not illegal as there is no bar to investigate the matter by the police when cognizable offence has taken place irrespective of penal provisions whether under the special enactment or general law, but does not dispute that in view of Section 195 (1) (a)(i) of Cr.P.C., section 22 of the Mines And Minerals (Development And Regulation) Act and section 43 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 the applicant cannot be prosecuted on the police report.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that pure legal question is involved in the matter therefore no useful purpose would be served in keeping this application pending before this Court and the same is being disposed of with the consent of the counsel for the parties at the admission stage itself.

6. Having examined the matter in its entirety, this Court is of the view that when there is a conflict between a special and general law, indisputably the special enactment shall prevail over the general law.

7. The issue in this regard has been settled by the Apex Court in the matter of (NCT of Delhi) v. Sanjay (2014) 9 SCC 772 as well as by this Court in the case of Imran and others v. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 3 All LJ 21. In the light of law laid down in the aforesaid judgments this Court is of the opinion that so far as cognizance taken by the Magistrate concerned on the impugned charge-sheet for the alleged offence and summoning of accused applicant vide order dated 11.08.2021 under Section 188 I.P.C., under Sections 4 /21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and sections 37 and 39 of Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 are concerned the same is not liable to be sustained in the eyes of law on account of categorical bar as noted above.

8. Accordingly, summoning order dated 11.08.2021 and further proceeding of aforesaid Case No. 2312 of 2021 are hereby quashed with liberty to the prosecution/Officer concerned to file complaint against the applicant in the matter.

9. With the aforesaid