- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9356 CRL.P No. 101192 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 101192 OF 2024 (482(CR.PC)/528(BNSS)) BETWEEN: HALAPPA LAKSHMAN HAROGERI, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: CHINCHALI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN-591 317. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. DEEPAK S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, R/BY SRI. SUJIT KULKARNI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: GEOLOGIST, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OFFICE, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, R/O: KUMARASWAMY EXTENSION, BELAGAVI, PIN-590 001. … RESPONDENT (BY SMT. GIRIJA S. HIREMATH, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11.02.2022 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RAIBAG FOR TAKING THE COGNIZANCE FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 4(1)(1A), 21 AND 22 OF MMDR ACT, 1957 R/W SECTION 44(1) OF KARNATAKA MINOR MINERAL CONCESSION RULES, 1994, SO FAR AS PETITIONER ARE CONCERNED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER IS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by RAKESH S HARIHAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.08.01 12:04:48 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9356 CRL.P No. 101192 of 2024 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) Petitioner is before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 11.02.2022 passed by the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Raibag, taking cognizance of offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1A), 21 and 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 read with Section 44(1) of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 and also to quash the entire proceedings in C.C. No.90/2022 pending before the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Raibag. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned HCGP for the respondent. 3. Based on the private complaint filed as provided under Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act) by the Geologist, attached to the Office of the Deputy Director of the Mines and Geology Department, Belagavi, proceedings was initiated against the petitioner herein and the learned Magistrate, vide the order - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9356 CRL.P No. 101192 of 2024 impugned dated 11.02.2022, had taken cognizance of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1A), 21 and 22 of the MMDR Act read with Section 44(1) of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having relied upon Section 22 and Section 30B of the MMDR Act, 1957, submits that the Court of Magistrate had no power to entertain the complaint and it is only the Special Court constituted under Section 30B of the MMDR Act can entertain a private complaint filed under the MMDR Act. He accordingly prays to allow the petition. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP who has opposed the petition submits that the Court of Magistrate is only a committal court for the purpose of committing a complaint to the Court of Special Judge since the MMDR Act does not provide power to the Court of Special Judge to take cognizance of the offences under the Act, without the complaint being committed by the jurisdictional court of Magistrate. In support of her argument, she has placed reliance on the judgment of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9356 CRL.P No. 101192 of 2024 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep S. Wodeyar vs. State of Karnataka1. 6. Section 22 and Section 30B of the MMDR Act reads as follows: 22. Cognizance of offences.―No court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under this Act or any rules made thereunder except upon complaint in writing made by a person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government or the State Government. 30B. Constitution of Special Courts.―(1) The State Government may, for the purposes of providing 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 who shall be 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. 1 (2021) 19 SCC 62 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9356 CRL.P No. 101192 of 2024 (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.” 7. As rightly contended by learned HCGP, the provisions of the MMRD Act, which is a special enactment does not specifically provide for the Special Court to take cognizance of the offences punishable under the provisions of the Act, without the complaint being committed to the said Court of jurisdictional Magistrate. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep S. Wodeyar vs. State of Karnataka having referred to the provisions of the MMDR Act, has held that even if the Special Court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable under the MMDR Act, without there being a committal order by the Court of Magistrate, the same is only an illegality which can be cured. Section 193 of Cr.P.C., which provides for cognizance of offence by the Court of sessions states that no Court of sessions shall take cognizance of offence as a Court of original jurisdiction unless the case has been committed to it by the Magistrate under this Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9356 CRL.P No. 101192 of 2024 8. Under the circumstances, since there is no provision under the MMDR Act for the Special Court to take cognizance of the offences punishable under the said Act, without the case being committed to it by the jurisdictional Court of Magistrate in view of Section 193 of Cr.P.C., the Court of jurisdictional Magistrate is the committal Court and therefore, the complaint filed in the present case before the Magistrate is maintainable. However, the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the alleged offences and on the other hand, on receipt of the complaint he was supposed to commit the case to the Special Court. Under the circumstances, the following: ORDER The criminal petition is partly allowed. The order dated 11.02.2022 passed by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Raibag, taking cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 4(1), 4(1A), 21 and 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 read with Section 44(1) of Karnataka Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1994 is quashed and the learned Magistrate is directed to commit the case to the Court of Special Judge as provided - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9356 CRL.P No. 101192 of 2024 under Section 193 of Cr.P.C. The learned Special Judge shall thereafter proceed in the case in accordance with law. Sd/- (S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE RSH / CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 78