IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 56 of 2011()
1. O.SIVARAJAN, S/O.UNNIKELU, AGED 54
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.B.N.SHIVSANKAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :27/01/2011
O R D E R
THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.Nos.4153 of 2010 and 56 of 2011
---------------------------------------
Dated this 27th day of January, 2011
ORDER
Petitioners are accused in Crime Nos.40 of 2010 and 41 of
2011, respectively of Mukkom Police Station for offences
punishable under Secs. 9(B)(1)(c) of the Explosive Act r/w Rules
119, 144, 146(1) of the Explosive Rules, 1983. Prosecution case
is that petitioners were using explosives in the quarries referred
to in the respective cases without the assistance of a blast man
and that explosives were not carried in a proper container or
required under the Rules. It is contended by learned counsel that
final reports are submitted based on Explosive Rules, 1983
which was repealed by the Explosive Rules 2008 with effect from
29.12.2008 while the alleged incident occurred thereafter. It is
also contended that petitioners had maintained all relevant
records as required under the law in force.
2. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners and the
learned Public Prosecutor.
3. Admittedly, the court has not framed charge against
petitioners. The question whether the materials on record
revealed any offence and if so, under which provision of law,
Crl.M.C.Nos.4153 of 2010 and 56 of 2011
-: 2 :-
whether it is under the Explosive Rules, 1983 or Explosive Rules,
2008, whether final reports are required to be returned to the
officers concerned to cure defects if any are all matters which the
trial court has to decide at the appropriate stage. It is open to the
petitioners to contend before the learned Magistrate that records
do not reveal any offence against the petitioners. In the
circumstance, it is not necessary for this court to go into those
questions in these proceedings under Sec.482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
Resultantly these criminal miscellaneous cases are closed
without prejudice to the right of petitioners to take up
appropriate plea/defence for discharge/acquittal before the
learned Magistrate at the appropriate stage.
(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)
Sbna/-