Main Search Premium Members Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 5 docs
Section 21 in THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981
The Factories Act, 1948
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
Section 411 in The Indian Penal Code
Section 379 in The Indian Penal Code

advertisement
advertisement

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Jharkhand High Court
Sanjay Mehta vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 May, 2014
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                             Cr. M. P. No. 3432 of 2013

             Sanjay Mehta                             .....   Petitioner(s)

                                         Versus
             State of Jharkhand                       ....      Opp. Party(s)

             CORAM:          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD

             For the Petitioner(s)       :      M/s Deepak Kumar,
                                                Sushil Dwivedi, Advocates.
             For the State                :     A.P.P.
                                        -----

02 /06.05.2014

. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

The First Information Report of Ichak P.S. Case No.188 of 2012 [corresponding to G.R. No.4126 of 2012] registered under Sections 379, 411 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 21 of the M.M.R.D. Act as well as under Section 54 of Jharkhand Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2004 and also under Section 21 of the Pollution and Environment Protection Act, is being sought to be quashed on the ground that no such allegation is there against the petitioner which attracts offences under which case has been registered.

The case has been lodged on the allegation that several persons named in the F.I.R. including the petitioner were found running or establishing crusher machines without having licence under the Factories Act or permission from Pollution Control Board. The matter is under investigation. It is for the Investigating Officer to find out as to whether the petitioner was involved in the illegal offence or not.

In that view of the matter, I do not find it a fit case for quashing of the First Information Report. and accordingly, this petition stands dismissed.

(R. R. Prasad, J.) Sandeep/