1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 21.07.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3588 of 2011 1.Lingam 2.Vaiyazhi Muthudevar : Petitioners -Vs- 1.The State through, The Inspector of Police, Achanpudur Police Station, Tenkasi Taluk, Tirunelveli District. 2.Jeja Rani The Sub Inspector of Police, Achanpudur Police Station, Tenkasi Taluk, Tirunelveli District. (R2 has given up by the petitioner on 21.07.2011) : Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to call for the records and quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.284 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi. For Petitioner : Mr.P.Muthudurai For Respondent : Mr.A.P.Balasubramani, G.A. (Crl. Side) O R D E R This petition is filed to call for the records and quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.284 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi. 2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are arrayed as accused in crime No.72 of 2010 on the file of the respondent police for the offence under Sections 379 I.P.C., 4(i) and 4(ii) of the Indian Arms Act read with Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957 read with G.O.Ms.12 Industry CMM CD Department dated 02.02.2010 on the basis of the complaint given by the Sub Inspector of Police and subsequently, it was taken on file in C.C.No.284 of 2010 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi. 3.The case of the prosecution is that on 02.05.2010 at 10.30 a.m., when the respondent police conducted vehicle checkup, the petitioner was driving the Tractor bearing Registration No.TN 76 C 3670 along with Trailor bearing Registration No.TN 76 C 4398 with saral sand and when they stopped the vehicle and enquired, it is alleged that they transported the saral sand without any permission from the government and hence, a case been registered in crime No72 of 2011 on the file of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 respondent police for the offence under Sections 379 I.P.C., 4(i) and 4 (ii) of the Indian Arms Act read with Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957 read with G.O.Ms.12 Industry CMM CD Department dated 02.02.2010, on the basis of the complaint given by the Sub Inspector of Police, which was subsequently taken on file in C.C.No.284 of 2010 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi. 4.At the time of argument, even though the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner raised so many grounds, the main and foremost submission is that the complaint has not been given by the authorized person and hence, the complaint itself is non exist in the eye of law and hence, he prayed for the quashment of the proceedings. To substantiate the same, he relied upon the decisions of this Court. 5.The learned Government Advocate would file his counter and submit that there is no scope for quashing the F.I.R. and the petitioners have transported the saral sand illegally without any permission and hence, the ingredients of the provisions have been made out. He would further submit that as per the government order, the Inspector of Police is entitled to register a case and hence, he prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition. 6.I have heard the rival submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record. 7.On perusal of the record would show that the complaint has been given by one Shija Rani, Sub Inspector of Police. At this juncture, it is appropriate to consider the government order, wherein, it has been specifically mentioned as follows: “The Governor of Tamil Nadu hereby authorises the District Forest Officers and the Police personnel not below the rank of Inspector of Police, to make complaint in writing to the Court of competent jurisdiction for any offence punishable under Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957.” 8.At this juncture, it is also appropriate to consider the decision relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in D.Sudharsan Vs. State represented by the Inspector of Police, Rajakkamangalam Police Station, Kanyakumari District, wherein, this Court has held that when a special enactment has been invoked to deal with such offences, invoking general provisions of Indian Penal Code will be meaningless and hence, the Village Administrative Officer is not the authorised person by the State Government to proceed against the accused for offence alleged in that F.I.R. 9.Considering the said decision along with the facts of the present case, as per the government order, only the police official not below the rank of Inspector of Police is authorised to proceed against the accused for the offence under Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals Act. But, here, the complaint has been given by the Special Sub Inspector of Police and therefore, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case to quash the proceedings. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 10.The complainant is not the competent authority to initiate the proceedings, while considering the order dated 16.06.2011 made in Crl.O.P.No.5415 of 2011, wherein it has held that when a prosecution was launched by a person, who was not authorised, the complaint is liable to be quashed as per the decision in Balasubramanian and 3 others Vs. The State rep. By the Inspector of Police, Velur Police Station, Namakkal District reported in 2009-2-L.W. (Crl.) 878. 11.Considering the said decisions along with the facts of the presence case, the petitioner is an accused for the offence under Sections 379 I.P.C., 4(i) and 4(ii) of the Indian Arms Act read with Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957 read with G.O.Ms.12 Industry CMM CD Department dated 02.02.2010 and the prosecution was launched by the Sub Inspector of Police, who was not authorised and hence, following the said judgments, I am of the view that this is a fit case to quash the proceedings and the criminal original petition is liable to be allowed. 12.Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.284 of 2010 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi, is hereby quashed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Inspector of Police, Achanpudur Police Station, Tenkasi Taluk,Tirunelveli District. 2.The Judicial Magistrate, Tenkasi. 3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. Arul GH : 04.08.2011 : 3p/4c Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3588 of 2011 21.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/