CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.10290 OF 2004 ********** In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ********** MD. NASEEM, S/O MD. ALAUDDIN, R/O SITAKUND ROAD, BARDAH, POLICE STATION: MOFASSIL, DISTRICT- MUNGER --------------------------(Appellant) Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, MUNGER, P.O. & P.S.: MUNGER, DISTRICT: MUNGER. 3. DISTRICT MINES OFFICER, MUNGER, P.P. AND P.S.: MUNGER, DISTRICT: MUNGER. 4. FOREST AREA OFFICER, JAMALPUR AREA, MUNGER. 5. FOREST DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MUNGER DIVISION MUNGER. -----------------------(Respondents) ************ For the Petitioner : ANIL KUMAR ADVOCATE For the State : MR. C. JAWAHAR P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ********* Anjana Prakash, J. The petitioner seeks quashing of complaint case no. 390 (C) – 3 of 2000 instituted for offences punishable under Sections 26(g), 41, 42 of Indian Forest Act and under Section 2 (ii) of the Forest Conservation Act pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Munger. 2. This application on 5.10.2004 was admitted with notices to opposite party no. 2,3,4 and 5 but notices were served only upon opposite party no. 2,3 and 5 whereas the application stood dismissed as against opposite party no. 4. Today no one appears on behalf of the opposite parties. 3. The case of the complainant is that the petitioner had excavated a certain piece of land by using a blast method and converted to stone despite it lying within the forest area. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that on 10.12.1986 the petitioner had entered into an agreement of lease with Collector, Munger, which was granted from 2.7.1986 for a period of three years. Thereafter, on 1.11.1990 once again the petitioner was granted three years mining lease and it is on that strength that the petitioner had excavated in the area. It has been submitted that once the application of the petitioner for further renewal of the mining lease was rejected he stopped his mining operations and in fact even today the stone which had been excavated earlier for which there were no buyers was lying at the site and this case on erroneous findings has been instituted by the forest department considering the same to be freshly mined. The further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was operating in the area only on the basis of the license having been granted by the mining department and there was no fault of the petitioner, if there was a dispute between the mining department and the forest department with regard to the land in question. Since no one appears on behalf of the opposite parties, I have no option but to accept the proposition advanced by the petitioner. 4. In view of such, this application is allowed and complaint case no. 390 (C) – 3 of 2000 instituted for offences punishable under Sections 26(g), 41, 42 of Indian Forest Act and under Section 2 (ii) of the Forest Conservation Act pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Munger., is quashed. 5. Application stands allowed. ( Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna Dated the 12th July, 2010 NAFR/ Fahad.