-1-



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
     DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015
                              BEFORE
          THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA
            CRIMINAL PETITION No.5095/2014
BETWEEN:

   1. M/s.Janapriya Engineers
      Syndicate Pvt. Ltd.,
      Represented by its Chairman
      Sri.K.Ravindra Reddy
      No.124/1B, Arshinakunte,
      Kasaba hobli, Nelamangala taluk,
      Bangalore Rural district.

   2. Sri.K.Ravindra Reddy
      Chairman & Managing Director
      M/s.Janapriya Engineers
      Syndicate Pvt. Ltd.,
      No.478, 12th cross, Wilson Garden,
      Bangalore-560 027.
                                           ...PETITIONERS
(By Sri.S.G.Bhagawan, Adv. )

AND:

Karnataka State Pollution Control Board
By its Deputy Environmental Officer
Mr.E.Prakash, Peenya Industrial Area
Bangalore North-560 002.
                                            ...RESPONDENT
(By Sri.Guruaj Joshi, Adv.)
                                    -2-



       This Crl.P. is filed u/S.482 of Cr.P.C praying to quash the
entire proceedings in C.C.No.47/2011 pending in the court of CJ
and JMFC, Nelamangala, to meet the ends of justice.

      This Crl.P. coming on for admission this day, the Court
made the following:-

                             ORDER

The petitioner is arrayed as accused in C.C.No.47/2011 registered for offences punishable under Sections 25 and 26 and also under Sections 41(2), 43 and 44 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. He has filed this petition to quash the proceedings interalia contenting that the complaint was not filed by the Authorised Officer as required under Section 49 of the Act.

2. I have heard Sri.S.G.Bhagawan, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri.Gururaj Joshi, learned counsel for respondent.

3. Perused the complaint and list of documents annexed to the complaint. In the list of documents, copy of authorization letter is mentioned at Sl.No.13.

4. If the petitioner (accused) feels that there was no proper authorization to initiate the complaint, he is at liberty to raise such a contention before the trial court.

5. The petition is dismissed with these observations.

Sd/-

JUDGE Srl.