IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR GUPTA

th

ON THE 20 OF NOVEMBER, 2025 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 32109 of 2024 GIRRAJ RAJORIYA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Aman Agarwal - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Saket Udeniya- PP for the State.

ORDER The instant petitioner has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C./528 of BNSS for quashing of the FIR registered at Crime No.748/2020 for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 414 of IPC r/w Section 4 and 21 of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Sectio 18(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2006 at Police Station Civil Lines, District Morena as well as entire criminal proceedings initiated and pending in RCT. No. 946/2024 before JMFC, Morena District Morena. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner deals in the business of Brick Klin with the lease dated 12.02.2019 duly granted by the Collector, District, Morena for the manufacture of Bricks from the land owned and possessed by him bearing survey no. 2206 min-2/1 area 1.338 hectare situated in Village Devri, Tehsil and District Morena.

3 . The story of the prosecution/Mining Inspector is that while patrolling, two tractors were used for the so-called commission of offence under aforesaid acts for illegally transporting the bricks and seized from the Brick Kiln of the petitioner. It is also alleged that the seized vehicles were found loaded with Bricks and since lease granted to the petitioner for manufacture of Bricks was not complete in all respects as other formalities like environment clearance etc. are lying pending hence, it attracts the offence. On the basis of said story aforementioned FIR registered and criminal case set into motion. Same was forwarded to the Mining Department for further action, a proceeding was initiated by the Mining Officer and a show cause notice issued to the petitioner and afterwards on an application filed by the petitioner, compounding order was passed by the Additional Collector, District Morena dated 09.10.2023 in Case No.

0016/2021-22/67.

4. Thereafter Additional Collector, District Morena in Case No.

0016/2021-22/A-67/413 vide its order dated 20.06.2024 found that aforesaid order dated 09.10.2023 (Annexure P/4) was in violation of the principles of natural justice and also suffers from the error apparent on the face of record because there was a valid lease granted by the Collector, District Morena in favour of the petitioner and thus, no offence was committed by the petitioner while manufacturing the Bricks for which he possessed clothed valid legal authority and eventually the Additional Collector quashed/set aside the order dated 09.10.2023 and issued notice in this regard.

5. It is further submitted by counsel for petitioner that the complainant/Police is not having authority to register a criminal case wherein the allegation of illegal transportation or manufacture of Bricks is there and it is only the sole authority of Mining Department but in spite of that complainant who is a police person has registered a criminal case and as such entire prosecution is nothing but abuse of process of law and suffers from jurisdictional error.

6. The Additional Collector, District Morena has already compounded the offence by imposing penalty against the alleged activity of petitioner of manufacturing of Bricks in particular then also quashed/set aside the said order of compounding dated 09.10.2023 holding that entire action against the petitioner since inception was wrong because petitioner was validly operating the activity of manufacturing of Bricks in light of lease granted in his favour.

7. When the offence of so-called mining has already been compounded has been recalled/reviewed finding that no offence was committed by the petitioner then the provisions of IPC as well as other provisions of Mining law do not attract in the