IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2010 / 14TH ASWINA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 4068 of 2010() ------------------------ CC.182/2010 OF JUDL.FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, CHERTHALA CRIME NO. 225/09 OF POOCHACKAL POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA ................. PETITIONERS / ACCUSED 1 & 2 : --------------------------------------------- 1. MALIK, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMAD, K.M.MANZIL, AROOKUTTY, WARD NO.7, VADUTHALA JETTY P.O., CHERTHALA. 2. IBRAHIM, S/O.KUNJU MUHAMMAD, IDIMANALUNKAL, AROOKUTTY, WARD NO.4, VADUTHALA JETTY P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.ABDUL JALEEL.A RESPONDENTS / COMPLAINANT : ---------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOCHACKAL P.S, POOCHACKAL P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT – 688526. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. M.K. PUSHPALATHA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/10/2010, ALONG WITH CRMC.NO. 4069/2010 & CRMC.NO.4070/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO.4068, 4069 & 4070 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated 6th October, 2010 O R D E R Petitioners in Crl.M.C.4068/2010 are the accused in C.C.182/2010, petitioner in Crl.M.C.4069/2010 is the accused in C.C.169/2010 and petitioner in Crl.M.C.4070/2010 is the accused in C.C.103/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Cherthala. In all these cases, cognizance were taken for the offence under Section 17(4) and 23 read with Section 20 of Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act and Section 4(1) read with Section 21(1) of Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation)Act, 1957 and Rule 58 of Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules on a Crmc 4068, 4069 & 4070/10 2 final report submitted under Section 173(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure by the Sub Inspector of Police, Poochackal. Then petitions are filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the cognizance taken contending that cognizance could have been taken only on a complaint filed by an officer authorised under the Act and not on a final report submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police. 2. The question has been settled by this Court in the decisions reported in Abdul Azeez v. State of Kerala (2010 (1) KLT 394) as approved in Ismail & others v. State of Kerala & others (2010 (3) KHC 677 (DB) holding that cognizance can only be taken on a complaint filed by an authorised officer and not on a final report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police under Section 173(2) of Code of Criminal Crmc 4068, 4069 & 4070/10 3 Procedure. In view of the law, cognizance taken can only be quashed. Petitions are allowed. Cognizance taken in C.C.182/2010, C.C.169/2010 and C.C.103/2010 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-II, Cherthala are quashed. It is made clear that quashing of the cognizance taken will not prevent the officer authorised under the Act to file a complaint or the learned Magistrate to take cognizance on such complaint. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.