LALITHAMBIKA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first accused, the Secretary, Kumarakom Lime Shell Cooperative Ltd. No.17/82, Kumarakom, Kottayam District, along with accused 2 to 69, who are the members of the first petitioner Society, are facing the allegation for the violation of S.4(1) read with S.21(1) and 23 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957, in short 'the Central Act', in C.C. No.104/2001 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of the 1st Class, Ramankari. They have come up before this Court by filing this petition under S.482 CrPC. to quash Annexure-I complaint filed by the second respondent, Geologist, District Office, Department of Mining and Geology, Alappuzha.

(2.) The facts required for disposal of this petition are that, on 24.10.2000, the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, Pulinkunnu, Alappuzha District, had seized 66 country boats, with 250 tins (one tin = one cubic foot) of white lime shells. He took the boats and the lime shells into custody, as accused 2 to 69 were doing mining operations and extracting lime shells from the Government land in 'Q' Block (Chithira Kayal), which is protected from Vembanad Lake with bunds. The seized boats and white lime shells together with the documents, like seizure mahazar and other details, were transferred to the second respondent. Thereafter, the second respondent, along with the officers of the Department and police officials of Pulinkunnu Police Station, inspected the seized boats and lime shells as well as the occurrence site at puramboke land of Chithira Kayal at Kainakaray North Village of Kuttanadu Taluk. It was satisfied by the second respondent that the areas from where the 56 country boats were taken into custody was not covered under a mining lease as per S.4(1) of the Central Act, or any other mineral concessions, as contemplated under the said Act. Because of this violation, it is punishable under Ss.21(1) and 23 of the Central Act. The second respondent filed Annexure-I complaint before the Magistrate Court. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the same. The petitioners are hence praying to quash the said proceedings thus initiated against them.

(3.) Heard both sides. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the second respondent is not a competent person to prefer Annexure-I complaint. The White Lime Shell is not an item under Schedule.1(c) of the Central Act, and therefore, no violation of any of the provisions of the Central Act, was committed by the petitioners. The further contention is that the State of Kerala is governed by the Kerala Lime Shells (Control) Act, 1957 (Act 18 of 1958), in short 'the Kerala Act', which controls the acquisition, sale, supply and distribution of lime shells in the State of Kerala, and therefore, the proceedings initiated by the second respondent under the Central Act is an abuse of process of law, and hence prayed to quash the same.