W.P.(Cr.) No. 285 of 2013




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                           W.P.(Cr.) No. 285 of 2013

                1. Akhtar Alam
                2. Kayum Ansari                                            ... ... ... Petitioners
                                                          -V e r s u s -
                 1. The State of Jharkhand;
                 2. District Officer, Khunti
                 3. Assistant Mining Officer, Khunti
                                                                           ... ... ... Respondents

               CORAM: -       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. UPADHYAY

               For the Petitioners   : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate.
               For the State         : Mr. R. Mukhoppadhyay, S.C. - II

3/31.01.2014

Heard the parties.

This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to give direction to respondent nos. 2 and 3 to allow the petitioners to run their crushers which have been sealed by the Assistant Mining Officer, Khunti in connection with Khunti P.S. Case No. 33 of 2013.

It appears from the F.I.R. that a raid was conducted and the petitioners were found running their crushers without obtaining 'No Objection Certificate' from the Pollution Control Board. Since they have violated the terms and conditions of the Minor Mineral Concession Rules, case against them was registered.

It is contended that the authorities have no power to seal premises of any crusher even if it is found running violating the Minor Mineral Concession Rule or the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. Furthermore, the petitioners have already obtained the required No Objection Certificate from the Board concerned and after obtaining the same, they have sought permission from the Mining Department to permit them to continue their business but a reply has been given that the matter is subjudice in the court.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents - State has submitted that on the date of occurrence, the petitioners were not having valid documents and permission to run the crushers and they have been found running their Crushers in utter violation of the Rules and, therefore, the case was registered. Both the petitioners have obtained permission and 'No Objection' to establish the Crushers but the fact remains that they have been found running the crushers without documents earlier.

W.P.(Cr.) No. 285 of 2013 Learned counsel appearing for the State has also failed to bring on record any law under which the Crushers can be sealed for violation of Minor Mineral Concession Rule or even for the reason that 'No Objection' from the Pollution Control Board has not been taken.

I have gone through the documents placed before me as well as F.I.R. and the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioners. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were found running crushers without having 'No Objection Certificate' from the Pollution Board and for that, Khunti P.S. Case No. 33 of 2013 was registered. The petitioners, after obtaining bail in the said case, applied for 'No Objection Certificate' from the Pollution Control Board. After fulfilling all the requirement to run the Crushers, the petitioners have applied before the Mining Department to allow them to run their Crushers but they have given evasive reply that the matter is subjudice in Court.

It is made clear that the Crushers were not sealed by order of the Court rather Assistant Mining Officer, after instituting the case, had sealed the premises. It is also made clear that for the offences committed by the petitioners, they are liable to be punished in the case lodged against them. Since the petitioners are having valid documents to run crushers and seals were not put with support of any Law or the Rules, the District Mining Officer as well as the Assistant Mining Officer, Khunti are directed to permit the petitioners to run their Crushers from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order and no obstruction shall be made if the Crushers are run in accordance with law in future. The Officer Incharge, Khunti Police Station shall also not create any bar on the ground that the case against the petitioners are instituted.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) RC