Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 72465 (ALL)

UMESH AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A482/21387/2024 · 2025-05-07

Deepak Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74277 Court No. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21387 of 2024 Applicant :- Umesh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire criminal proceedings as well as chargesheet dated 13.12.2023 in Case No. 1024 of 2024, Crime No. 214 of 2023, Under Section 379 I.P.C, and Section 15 (1) of Mines and Minerals Act, Police Station Naseerpur, District- Firozabad, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Firozabad. 3. Applicants' counsel submitted that instant proceedings U/s 379 I.P.C, and Section 15 (1) of Mines and Minerals Act is a State case in the eyes of law. The court has taken cognizance under the aforesaid sections. As per Section 22 of U.P. Mines and Minerals Act, complaint shall lodge and proceed against the person committed offence. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance over the judgment of co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in 482 applicant No.25124 of 2024, Ikrar Khan Vs. State of U.P. and another, vide order dated 17.07.2023, the observation of the Hon'ble Court is quoted herein below:- "Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that pure legal question is involved in the matter therefore, no useful purpose would be served in keeping this application pending before this Court and the same is being disposed of with the consent of the counsel for the parties at the admission stage itself. Having examined the matter in its entirety, this Court is of the view that when there is a conflict between a special and general law, indisputably the special enactment shall prevail over the general law, therefore on account of categorical bar under Section 22 of the MMDR Act 1957, the police officer cannot submit police report under Section 173 Cr.PC with regard to offence under Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and Sections 3/57 of The Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules. The issue in this regard has been settled by the Apex Court in the matter of [State (NCT) of Delhi vs. Sanjay], (2014) 9 SCC 772 as well as by this Court in the case of Imran and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 3 All LJ 21. In the light of law laid down in the aforesaid judgments, this Court is of the opinion that so far as cognizance taken by the Magistrate concerned on impugned charge-sheet for the offence under Section 379, 411 IPC is concerned, it cannot said to be illegal and without authority but so far as cognizance taken for the offence under Sections 3/57 of The Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules and Sections 4/21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act on the impugned charge-sheet dated 24.11.2019 is concerned, the same is not liable to be sustained in the eyes of law on account of categorical bar contained in Section 22 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act. Accordingly, further proceeding of Case No. 4362 of 2020 with regard to offence under Sections 3/57 of The Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules and Sections 4/21 Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act is concerned, the same is hereby quashed with liberty to the prosecution/Officer concerned to file complaint against the applicant under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 as well as Sections 3/57 of The Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules. It is made clear that so far as order taking cognizance with Section 379, 411 IPC is concerned, that has not been interfered by this Court and the concerned Court below is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law against the applicant pursuant to the charge-sheet dated 24.11.2019. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is partly allowed." 4. In view of above observation, order taking cognizance with Section 379 IPC is concerned, that has not been interfered by this Court and the concerned Court below is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law against the applicants pursuant to the charge- sheet dated 13.12.2023 and proceedings of Case No.1024 of 2024 with regard to 15(1) of Mines and Minerals Act is concerned, the same is hereby quashed. 5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is partly allowed. 6. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court below, within two weeks from today. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 Nitin Verma Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad