- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1941 WP No. 100501 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT PETITION NO. 100501 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. K. RAJASHEKHAR S/O. SRI. BASAVARAJ HITNAL AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, PARTNER M/S K. RAJASHEKAR STONE CRUSHERS, HITNAL VILLAGE, KOPPAL TALUK, KOPPAL DIST-583234. 2. SRI. KOTRESH V. NALWAD S/O. SRI. VEERANNA NALWAD, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, PARTNER M/S GAVISHREE STONE CRUSHERS, LALITHA NIVAS, 2ND CROSS, GAVI MUT ROAD, GAVISHREE NAGAR, KOPPAL TOWN, KOPPAL TQ AND DIST-583234. 3. SRI. G. RAGHAVENDRA S/O. SRI. AMBANNA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, PARTNER M/S SRI. SRINIVASA STONE CRUSHERS, NO .5, WARD NO.10, BELLARY-583201. 4. SRI. JADIYAPPA V. BANGALI S/O. SRI. NARASAPPA BANGALI, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, PROPRIETOR: M/S SRIRAM STONE CRUSHERS, NO. 46, CHIKKBAGANAL VILLAGE, KOPPAL TALUK AND DIST-583228. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MRUTYUNJAYA S. HALLIKERI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT Digitally signed by B K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.02.05 12:54:40 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1941 WP No. 100501 of 2023 OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KOPPAL TOWN, KOPPAL TALUK AND DIST-583234. 2. SENIOR GEOLOGIST DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY KOPPAL TOWN, KOPPAL TALUK AND DIST-583234. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, ADDL. GOVT. ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN PASSING THE ORDER DATED 16.07.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT KOPPAL FOR TAKING COGNIZANCE OF PCR NO. 424/2022 FILED UNDER SECTION 200 OF CR. PC UNDER SECTIONS 4(1) (1- A), SECTION 22 READ WITH RULE 3(1) , RULE 42(1) OF MINES AND MINERAL (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, SECTION 21(1), SECTION 21(2) AND RULE 44(1), 44(2) , 44(3) OF THE KARNATAKA MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER 1. The cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1-A), and 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, and Rule 3(1), 42(1) of the MMDR Act, and Section 21(1) and 21(2) and Rules 44(1), 44(2), and 44(3) of the Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, is impugned in this petition. 2. Respondent No.2 filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. alleging that the petitioner unauthorizedly transported building stones without permission or license as - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1941 WP No. 100501 of 2023 required under the Act and Rules, and that the license granted to the petitioner for crushing stone had expired. 3. The issue here is whether the learned Magistrate can take cognizance of the offence, a question which has already been examined by this Court in Crl.P.No.100525/2017, wherein in paragraphs 3 and 4, it was observed as follows: “3. The provision under Section 30B of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act) confers special status on Special Courts, and the Government is required to establish Special Courts for the purpose of trying offences under the MMDR Act. Section 30B of the MMDR Act reads as follows: “30B. Constitution of Special Courts.- (1) The State Government may, for the purposes of providing a speedy trial of offences for contravention of the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) of section 4, constitute, by notification, as many Special Courts as may be necessary for such area or areas, as may be specified in the notification. (2) A Special Court shall consist of a Judge appointed by the State Government with the concurrence of the High Court. (3) A person shall not be qualified for appointment as a Judge of a Special Court unless he is or has been a District and Sessions Judge. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1941 WP No. 100501 of 2023 (4) Any person aggrieved by the order of the Special Court may prefer an appeal to the High Court within a period of sixty days from the date of such order.” 4. In view of the above provision, to deal with matters under the MMDR Act, the Government has issued a notification constituting Special Courts for the purpose of dealing with offences under the MMDR Act. As per Section 30B of the MMDR Act and the notification issued, the Principal District and Sessions Judges of each district have been designated as the Special Judges. It is therefore clear that Judicial Magistrates of First Class have no jurisdiction to entertain complaints related to allegations under the MMDR Act or the Rules thereunder and associated offences. The factual matrix in this case reveals that the Geologist (Respondent No.3) filed a private complaint before the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and JMFC, Ranebennur, against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1-A), and 21 of the MMDR Act, 1957, Rules 3(1), 36, 42, and 44(1) of the KMMC Rules, 1994, and under Rules 3-B and 3-C of the Karnataka Regulation of Stone Crushers Rules, 2012, read with Section 16(1) of the Karnataka Regulation of Stone Crushers Act, 2011. The learned Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and JMFC, Ranebennur, after receiving the complaint, took cognizance and issued summons to the accused vide orders dated 02.11.2016 by registering Criminal Case No. 692/2016. The registration of the case, taking cognizance, and issuing process is without jurisdiction by the Magistrate. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned JMFC could not have entertained the complaint, taken cognizance, and issued summons - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1941 WP No. 100501 of 2023 to the petitioners. The complaint specifically discloses allegations of offences under Sections 4(1), 4(1-A) of the MMDR Act, Sections 3(1), 36, 42 of the MMDR Act. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The petition is allowed. ii) The impugned proceedings in PCR No.424/2022 pending on the file of the learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Koppal is hereby quashed. iii) Liberty is reserved to the respondent No.2 to file a complaint before the appropriate Court, if permissible in law. JTR Ct:vh Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE