RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. V. P. Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. K. Amar, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
(2.) IN this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No. 791 of 2006 including the order dated 15.03.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Daltonganj whereby and whereunder cognizance has been taken for the offences punishable under Sections 384/386/420/504 of Indian Penal Code.
(3.) A complaint case was instituted by the opposite party no. 2 herein in which it was stated that the complainant had came in possession of 1 acre 37 decimals of land of Khata No. 29, Plot No. 185 situated at Datam Police Station by way of transfer by execution of deed of lease by its raiyat Rampati Devi. It has been stated that the complainant has applied for licence of mining lime stone and after fulfilling the entire process requested the petitioner to go to Datam where the land of the petitioner was situated and accordingly, the petitioner went with her to Datum and took the sample of lime and thereafter the same was sent to the Geological Laboratory, Hazaribagh. In the meantime, the petitioner allowed her to work upon the land from where the sample was taken and the licence was issued to her being licence no. 16 of 2006. It has been alleged that after grant of mining lease, the petitioner continued to make illegal demands of Rs. 15,000/ - with a threat that if the demand is not fulfilled, her licence will be cancelled. It has further been alleged that the petitioner was restrained from carrying on mining activities on the ground that mining work is being done not upon the plot no. 185, but upon plot no. 158 and which according to him was a forest land. It has further been alleged that the Divisional Forest Officer, South Garhwa Forest Division, issued a letter dated 01.08.2006 by which she was informed that plot no. 185 and 158 are adjacent and the petitioner was restrained from carrying on mining activities in the said plot of land. It has also been alleged that a letter was issued by the petitioner to the complainant in which the licence for mining work of the complainant was cancelled and she was directed to deposit Rs. 9,520/ - on the ground that she had illegally mined 200 sq. feet of land. After the complaint case was filed, inquiry was conducted under Section 202 and after examining the complainant under solemn affirmation and her witnesses vide order dated 15.03.2007 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Daltonganj, Palamau, cognizance was taken for the offences punishable under Sections 384/386/420/504 of Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that this is a case of malicious prosecution, inasmuch as, the petitioner in the capacity of the District Mining Officer had issued licence to the complainant opposite party no. 2, but subsequently it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that instead of carrying on mining activities on plot no. 185, he has doing mining activities on plot no. 158 which is a forest land. It has further been submitted that a show -cause notice had been issued to the complainant opposite party no. 2 and after considering the show -cause, the licence of the opposite party no. 2 was cancelled. He has further submitted that the licence was cancelled on 09.09.2006 and as a counter blast, a complaint case was filed on 27.09.2006 making baseless allegations against the petitioners. He has further submitted that the petitioner is a government servant and no prior sanction was taken before instituting the case. He thus submits that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Daltonganj did not apply his judicial mind while taking cognizance vide order dated 15.03.2007.;