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. 4086 of 2010() ------------------------------------- CC.758/2006 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT-III, TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER/3RD ACCUSED: ----------------------------------------- NADARSHAW, AGED 40, S/O.IBRAHIMKUTTY ALFA MANZIL, NEAR MADANVILA UPS, AZHOOR DESOM, AZHOOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS, SMT.S.SIKKY. RESPONDENT/STATE & COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.M.K. PUSHPALATHA. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. --------------------------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO.4086 OF 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated 6th October, 2010 O R D E R Petitioner is the third accused in C.C.758/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram taken cognizance for the offence under Section 4(1) (A), 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, on a final report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police, Kazhakuttam. This petition is 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 authorized under the Act and not on a final report submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Crmc 4086/10 2 petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor were heard. 3. Annexure-1 shows that cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate on a final report submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kazhakkuttam and not on a complaint as provided under the Act. Question whether cognizance could be taken on the final report 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 be taken only on a complaint filed by an officer authorised under the Act and not on a final report submitted by Sub Inspector of Police under Section 173(2) of Code of Criminal Crmc 4086/10 3 Procedure. In such circumstances, cognizance taken can only be quashed. Petition is allowed. Cognizance taken in C.C.758/2006 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-III, Thiruvananthapuram is 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 a complaint. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.