PRASHANT KUMAR, J. - (1.) THIS is an application for quashing the entire criminal prosecution in connection with Topchanchi P.S. Case No. 144 of 2005 corresponding to G.R. No. 3967 of 2005 pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.
(2.) THE case of prosecution in short is that on 26.09.2005, police received secret information that a truck bearing registration No. BHB -4890 loaded with illicit coal is standing in front of Sahu Filling Petrol Pump at G.T. Raod. On that information, police intercepted the said truck and verified the documents regarding the coal loaded on it. The driver of Equivalent Citation:2009 -JX(Jhar) -0 -1154 the said truck disclosed that the said coal was loaded on the truck by one Shankar Singh. It is further alleged that the said truck belongs to this petitioner. The driver produced some papers regarding the coal, which reveals that the said coal was loaded on the truck from Maa Bhawani Fuel Industries, Jamtara, Jamuria District - Burdwan. However, when the driver of the truck was asked to show the place from where the said coal was loaded, he had shown another place i.e. Maa Mutai Chandi Fuel Industries, Shyamdih, P.S. -Salanpur, District -Burdwan. Thus, police suspected that the coal in question is a stolen property, therefore, the present case instituted under Sections 414, 420/34 of the I.P.C. and also under Section 21(1) of MMDR Act, 1957. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that as per Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred as MMDR Act), no court can take cognizance of any offence punishable under the MMDR Act except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorize in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government. Accordingly, it is submitted that if the learned Magistrate cannot take cognizance of the offence on the basis of charge sheet submitted by a police officer, then in that case the investigation undertaken by the police on the basis of present F.I.R. is futile and fruitless exercise. It is submitted that with regard to the transportation of coal which is a mineral within the meaning of MMDR Act, no offence under the I.P. C. is made out, therefore, the present prosecution against the petitioner is an abuse of the process of the Court.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Additional P.P. opposed the submission raised by learned Counsel for the petitioner and submits that Sectionof MMDR Act prohibits the court from taking cognizance, it does not prohibit the police officer from investigating the case. As per Section 156 of the Cr.P.C., the police have power to investigate a cognizable case without any sanction from Judicial Magistrate. Under the said circumstance, at this stage, it is not in the interest of justice to quash the F.I.R. and thereby put an embargo on the hands of police from investigating a case. It is further submitted that the offence under MMDR Act only attracted if somebody do mining of coals and transport or store the said minerals in contravention of provisions contained under Section 4 of MMDR Act. It is submitted that there is nothing in MMDR Act which provides any punishment to a person if he commit theft of coal from any other place and transport the stolen coal. In case of theft of coal offence under Section 414 of the I.P.C. is made out. Accordingly, it is submitted that there is no illegality in lodging of F.I.R. against the petitioner.;