CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.550 OF 2005
                          (In the matter of an application under
                       Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.)

             GHANSHYAM DHURKA, the Executive President, New India Sugar Mills Ltd.
             Hasanpur, P.O. Hasanpur Sugar Mills, District Samastipur
                                                               .....................Petitioner
                                                 Versus

             1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR

2. THE BIHAR STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, Through its Member Secretary, Boring Road, Patna at present having its office at 2nd Floor, Beltron Bhawan, Shastrinagar, Patna- 800023 .................Opposite Parties For the Petitioners : Mr. Y.V.Giri, Sr. Advocate For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Shivendra Kishore, Advocate For the State : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, A.P.P.

PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA Akhilesh Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, opposite party no. 2 Chandra.J.

and Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the sole petitioner seeking quashing of order dated 16.4.1988 passed by learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Patna in Case No. 32(M) of 1988, taking cognizance for the offences under Sections 41, 43 & 44 of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.

3. The Opposite Party No. 2, Bihar State Pollution Control Board, filed a complaint against two accused as New India Sugar Mills Ltd., through its Executive President and Executive Vice President, framing any person stating their respective names stating in 2 the complaint petition that Sugar factory was established in the year 1934, subsequently, after constitution of the Board vide State Government Notification No. 4796 dated 04.11.1974. The Board had earlier given consent to the accused persons for discharging their trade effluents and suffer for a period from 01.04.1987 to 31.03.1988 with the condition inter alia that they are submitting a time bound Programme for the treatment of their trade effluent by 15th of August 1987 and that analysis report of the effluent will made available to the Board every month during crisis seasons, but, instead of nothing very well that penal Clauses in the Act, the accused person directly did not comply any of the aforesaid conditions, consequently order given was cancelled and accordingly, information was given to the accused persons vide letter dated 25.09.1987.

4. In absence of consent the accused persons discharged their trade effluent and sewage etc. and thus have committed offence punishable under Sections 41, 43 and 44 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act.

5. The petitioners have come out with the case that the treatment plant has already been starting functioning on 06.11.1989, this fact is not controverted in the counter affidavit and during course of argument, it is also admitted that after installation of such plant on regular basis, Board has been giving consent to the industry.

6. Now it is to be seen whether this twenty two years old proceeding should continue or not, specially under the 3 circumstances when the period of violation was sought, no individual has been named and the persons holding post of Executive President and Vice President respectively are no more in the world which is also undisputed.

7. Even if the proceedings is permitted to continue against accused no. 1 New India Sugar Mills Ltd., a juristic person for the small period of two years, the punishment prescribed is fine without disclosing any amount.

8. My attention was drawn towards decision of this Court by another Bench dated 25.3.2010 in Cr. Misc. No. 21109 of 2005 wherein almost similar circumstances, the proceeding has been quashed. Taking into consideration, period lapses of twenty two years and case remained pending without for any progress.

9. In the aforesaid case, as it appears all the accused persons had come before this court seeking quashing of the proceeding. But here simply the petitioner no. 1 being the Executive President not holding said post at relevant period from 1987 to 1989 has come out. The learned counsel for the petitioner representing the company, accused no. 1 in other cases submits that if the proceeding is permitted to continue, it is not going to shown any effective purpose instead of any amount may be ordered to be deposited to compensate alleged violation of the provisions of the Act for a limited period. Learned counsel representing the Opposite Party No. 2 also concedes to the submission.

10. Taking into consideration, the nature of offence as 4 prayed for and in order to expedite disposal of the cases and submissions made above, this court finds that on deposit of a sum of Rs. 5,000/- with District Legal Services Authority, Samastipur, the impugned order and proceeding pending before the Court of Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in Complaint Case No. 32 M of 1998 may be quashed. As prayed, the aforesaid amount be deposited within six weeks. With the above direction and observation this application is stand disposed of.

Patna High Court                                                 ( Akhilesh Chandr, J.)
Date : 30th July 2010
Praveen/-