Sasi V.P v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/22ND MAGHA, 1936 Crl.MC.No. 864 of 2015 () -------------------------- CC 1920/2014 of JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I,HOSDRUG ================ PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.1 & 2:
------------------------------------------------
1. SASI V.P., AGED 45 YEARS S/O.KANNAN, VISMAYA HOUSE KOOTHUPARAMBU KANNUR DISTRICT.
2. ROJITH N., AGED 40 YEARS ROSHINI HOUSE, NEERVELI P.O.
KANNUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.I.V.PRAMOD RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
----------------------------------------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM 682 031.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE HOSDURG POLICE STATION, KASARGOD DISTRICT.
R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. S. HYMA THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Crl.MC.No. 864 of 2015 () APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------ ANNEXURE A1. COPY OF THE COMPLAINT/FINAL REPORT FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE JFCM 1 HOSDURG DATED 2.6.14. ANNEXURE A2. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF SUB COLLECTOR, KANJANHAD DATED 07.08.14.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------- NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE SD
P. UBAID, J.
--------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.864 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of February, 2015
O R D E R
A vehicle in the possession of the petitioners, with a load of sand, was seized by the police, on the allegation that river sand was transported in the vehicle. Accordingly, the police registered a crime against the petitioners under the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Regulation of Removal of Sand Act, 2001. (for short, 'the Sand Act'). During investigation it was revealed that the property is not river sand. The matter was reported to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kasaragod. Finding that it is not river sand at all, the Sub Divisional Magistrate released the vehicle to the petitioners. However, by the time the Sub Inspector submitted a final report against the petitioners in court under Sections 20 and 21 of the Sand Act. Cognizance was taken as C.C.1920/2014. The said prosecution is sought to be quashed. No doubt, the prosecution will have to be quashed, because the property involved is admittedly not river sand. Even otherwise, the prosecution will have to be quashed. The provisions of the
Crl.M.C.. No. 864/2015 Sand Act prohibit cognizance except on a complaint in writing made by the authorised officer. The police cannot bring prosecution under the Sand Act by way of final report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. If Sub Inspector is the authorised officer, he will have to file a proper complaint as meant under the law. If there is no proper complaint, the proceeding will have to be closed. Any way, the property is not river sand, and the petitioners cannot be prosecuted under the Sand Act. In the result, this petition is allowed. The prosecution against the petitioners in C.C.1920/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Hosdurg, will stand quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the petitioners will stand released from prosecution, and the bail bond, if any, executed by them will stand discharged.
Sd/- P. UBAID, JUDGE sd