HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 33441 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash cognizance order dated 21.02.2024 against the applicant passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur as well as quash the entire criminal proceeding in Criminal Case no. 2244 of 2024 (State vs. Shahdai Raza @ Guddu) under sections 188, 336 IPC and section 5/15 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, PS- Kutubsher, District Saharanpur including charge sheet dated 29.11.2023 submitted by the police after concluding the Case Crime no. 320 of 2023 under sections 188, 336 IPC and section 5/15 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, PS- Kutubsher, District Saharanpur. 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant submitted that in the present matter FIR has been registered at the behest of opposite party no. 2 against applicant for alleged offence committed by applicant under sections 188, 336 IPC and section 5/15 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. After conclusion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant whereupon cognizance of offence has been taken up by learned court concerned in pursuance to sections 188, 336 IPC and section 5/15 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 vide impugned order dated 21.02.2024. 4. Learned counsel for applicant contended that no court shall take cognizance unless a complaint has been preferred by the competent authority as mentioned under Section 19 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, but in the present case FIR has been lodged which is not sustainable and entire proceeding is liable to be quashed. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sayeed Saif Ullah, Sufia Saba Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shahdai Raza Alias Guddu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application. 6. For ready reference Section 19 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 is reproduced herein below: "19. Cognizance of offences.—No court shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act except on a complaint made by,— (a) the Central Government or any authority or officer authorised in this behalf by that Government; or (b) any person who has given notice of not less than sixty days, in the manner prescribed, of the alleged offence and of his intention to make a complaint, to the Central Government or the authority or officer authoris ed as aforesaid." 7. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, one thing is crystal clear that the procedure available under Section 19 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 is strictly applicable, if any sections of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 has been attracted for prosecuting the applicant but in the instant matter FIR has been lodged whereupon inquiry has been conducted by concerned Investigating Officer which culminated into preferring charge sheet whereupon cognizance of offence has been taken up by learned court concerned which is directly controverting the mandate of the procedure as defined under Section 19 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and as such learned trial court is hereby directed to proceed with trial of Criminal Case no. 2244 of 2024, specifically in pursuance to sections 188 and 336 of IPC. 8. The instant application u/s 528 BNSS stands partly allowed accordingly. 9. However, the authorities will be at liberty to proceed against the applicant in pursuance to sections 5/15 of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 against applicant, if required, strictly in accordance with Section 19 of Environment Protection Act, 1986. September 11, 2025 Shaswat NA528 No. 33441 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad