Transportation of Iron Ores without Payment of Royalty and Forest Development Tax: Karnataka HC dismisses Writ Petition by Former IFS Officer [Read Order]

The Karnataka High Court dismissed writ petition by a former Indian Forest Service (IFS) Officer in the alleged offence of transportation of iron ores without the payment of required royalty and Forest Development Tax.

The petitioner, S Muthaiah, is the accused in relation to the various First Information Reports (FIR) registered separately relating to the offence of illegally exporting mined Iron Ore material from Belekere Port without valid permit which is alleged to have been facilitated by the accused-petitioner, who was the then Deputy Conservator of Forests of Bellary District.

The petitioner is a Forest Officer of I.F.S. Cadre and was discharging duty as Deputy Conservator of Forests, Bellary Division at the relevant point of time. The directions by the Apex Court in its order of 07.09.2012 was to investigate cases relating to alleged illegal extraction of 50.79 lakh Metric Tons of Iron Ore from the forest areas between 01.01.2009 to 31.05.2010 and its illegal transportation to the Belekere Port.

The petitioner has assailed the order passed by the Special Judge, the Sanction orders issued by the State Government and Central Government according Sanction under Code of Criminal Procedure, Karnataka Forest Act and Prevention of Corruption Act respectively to prosecute the petitioner/accused has been upheld.

The question whether the area from which illegal mining has been resorted to after expiry of lease would still retain the character of forest land, whether mining was from a part of the forest land, whether the Iron Ore itself would come within the purview of 'forest produce', are matters that need not be adjudicated at this stage so as to close a prosecution which is being tested in trial.

A Single Bench of Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav noted that “It is also to be noticed that the discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is to be exercised to prevent abuse of process or to secure ends of justice only in exceptional cases. Where interference in exercise of such jurisdiction requires appreciation of evidence, finding on facts, it would be best left for such matters to be decided during trial.”

“In the present case, it must also be kept in mind that any finding regarding mining operations in a forest area or in non-forest area would have implication as regards other criminal cases also pending and accordingly, it may not be appropriate to jeopardize the cases against other accused by recording a finding as against the petitioner alone. Accordingly, this Court does not find any scope for interference and the Writ Petitions are dismissed” the Court concluded.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates