Madras High Court
Sridhar vs State Rep By on 30 June, 2022
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.06.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
and
Crl. M.P.No.7825 of 2020
Sridhar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. State Rep by
The Inspector of Police,
Cuddalore Port Police Station,
Cuddalore District.
(Crime No.452 of 2020)
2. Sundarraj,
VAO, Thiyagavalli,
Cuddalore – 75. ... Respondents
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal
Procedure Code, to call for the records in Crime No. 452 of 2020
pending before the Cuddalore Port Police Station, Cuddalore District and
quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj
For R1 : Mr.A.Gopinath
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
For R2 : No appearance
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
ORDER
This petition has been filed to quash the F.I.R. in Crime
No.452 of 2020 registered by the first respondent police for the offences
under Section 379 of IPC and Section 21(1) of the Mines and Minerals
(Development and Regulations) Act, 1957, as against the petitioner.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 13.08.2020 at 11.00
hours, the respondent police received a written complaint from the
Village Administrative Officer, Thiyagavalli, Cuddalore District. In the
complaint, it is stated that on 12.08.2020, when he along with higher
officials inspected the Village, they found that the petitioner in his patta
land in Survey No.296/13B segregating gravel sand illegally. Hence, the
case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
the petitioner transported the gravel sand with valid permission and as
such the petitioner does not constitute an offence under Section 21(1) of
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. The
petitioner had obtained valid permission from the Village Panchayat and
as such, no offence is made out.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
4. Whereas, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)
submitted that though the petitioner obtained permission to quarry, for
the period from 23.03.2018 to 22.03.2020 in the land comprised in
Survey Nos. 175/4, 175/5, 175/7A, 175/7B, 175/8B, 175/9, 177/1B and
177/2B to an extent of 2.33.80 hectare, after lapse of permission period,
the petitioner quarried the sand and as such the petitioner had committed
the offence punishable under Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals
(Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and Section 379 of IPC.
5. That apart, this Court finds that the FIR discloses prima
facie commission of cognizable offence and as such this Court cannot
interfere with the investigation. The investigating machinery has to step
in to investigation, grab and unearth the crime in accordance with the
procedures prescribed in the Code.
6. It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India passed in Crl.A.No.255 of 2019 dated
12.02.2019 in the case of Sau. Kamal Shivaji Pokarnekar vs. the State
of Maharashtra & ors., as follows:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
"4. The only point that arises for
our consideration in this case is whether the
High Court was right in setting aside the
order by which process was issued. It is
settled law that the Magistrate, at the stage
of taking cognizance and summoning, is
required to apply his judicial mind only with
a view to taking cognizance of the offence,
or in other words, to find out whether a
prima facie case has been made out for
summoning the accused persons. The
learned Magistrate is not required to
evaluate the merits of the material or
evidence in support of the complaint,
because the Magistrate must not undertake
the exercise to find out whether the materials
would lead to a conviction or not.
5. Quashing the criminal
proceedings is called for only in a case
where the complaint does not disclose any
offence, or is frivolous, vexatious, or
oppressive. If the allegations set out in the
complaint do not constitute the offence of
which cognizance has been taken by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
Magistrate, it is open to the High Court to
quash the same. It is not necessary that a
meticulous analysis of the case should be
done before the Trial to find out whether the
case would end in conviction or acquittal. If
it appears on a reading of the complaint and
consideration of the allegations therein, in
the light of the statement made on oath that
the ingredients of the offence are disclosed,
there would be no justification for the High
Court to interfere.
......................
9. Having heard the learned
Senior Counsel and examined the material
on record, we are of the considered view
that the High Court ought not to have set
aside the order passed by the Trial Court
issuing summons to the Respondents. A
perusal of the complaint discloses that prima
facie, offences that are alleged against the
Respondents. The correctness or otherwise
of the said allegations has to be decided only
in the Trial. At the initial stage of issuance
of process it is not open to the Courts to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
stifle the proceedings by entering into the
merits of the contentions made on behalf of
the accused. Criminal complaints cannot be
quashed only on the ground that the
allegations made therein appear to be of a
civil nature. If the ingredients of the offence
alleged against the accused are prima facie
made out in the complaint, the criminal
proceeding shall not be interdicted."
7. In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to
quash the First Information Report in Crime No.452 of 2020 on the file
of the first respondent Police. However, the first respondent is directed to
complete the investigation and file a final report, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands
dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.
30.06.2022
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Speaking / Non Speaking order
Lpp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Cuddalore Port Police Station,
Cuddalore District.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
Lpp
Crl.O.P.No.19457 of 2020
and
Crl. M.P.No.7825 of 2020
30.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
