Sebastian v. The Sub Inspector Of Police, Nedumbassery Police Station
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/26TH POUSHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 1749 of 2015 (P) --------------------------- PETITIONER :
----------------------- SEBASTIAN,S/O.KORATH, AGED 37 YEARS, KOTTAKKALI, AANAPPARA.P.O., MANJAPRA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, (OWNER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-17-B-9010) BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ RESPONDENT :
-------------------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMBASSERY POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 131.
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).NO.1749/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1 COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 14/1/2015 SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 1749 of 2015 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 16th day of January, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is the owner of the vehicle bearing No. KL 17 B 9010, is aggrieved of the seizure of the vehicle by the respondent on 14.01.2015, alleging illegal transportation of ordinary earth, as discernible from Ext. P1 report. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to compound the offence.
2. The issue involved in this case is, whether the petitioner, who has been proceeded against in respect of the offences under the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Kerala Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1967 is entitled to have the offence compounded in view of the desire expressed from his side in this regard.
4.
Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 5.
Section 23A of the 'Act and Rule 60A of the Rules enable the parties to have the offence compounded. The Rules specifically stipulate that any offence under the Rules can be compounded
W.P.(C) No. 1749 of 2015 : 2 :
subject to the satisfaction of the maximum fine prescribed under the Rules, which is stated as Rs.5,000/-. But in respect of the transportation of sand/earth without any valid pass/sanction, it is stated as an offence under the 'Act' itself by virtue of the incorporation of Section 4(1A), for which separate penalty is provided under the 'Act' itself. The maximum fine in respect of such offence prescribed under the 'Act' is stated as Rs.25,000/-. It was in the said circumstance, that this Court has been passing various orders in similar matters enabling the concerned parties to have the interim custody of the vehicle on satisfaction of a sum of Rs.25,000/- and also by directing the concerned respondent to consider the application for compounding, if any. 6.
A question arose before this Court as to whether the prosecution proceedings could be pursued further, once the offence is compounded in accordance with the relevant provisions. This issue has already been considered and decided by this Court in 2013 (1) KLT 600 ( Digil v. Sub Inspector of Police), holding that, once the offence is compounded, there cannot be any further prosecution proceedings.
7. In view of the law declared as mentioned herein before, there will be a direction to the concerned respondent to accept the
W.P.(C) No. 1749 of 2015 : 3 :
application to be filed by the petitioner to compound the offence; which shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed forthwith, subject to satisfaction of a sum of Rs.25000/- as the compounding fee. Once the offence is compounded, no prosecution proceedings shall lie against the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the respondent for further steps.
The writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd