Police personnel authorised to act against illegal mining, seize vehicles: Madras High Court Full Bench

A full bench of the Madras High Court recently held that police personnel are authorised to act against illegal mining activity under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act of 1957 and also to seize vehicles involved in such illegality. [S Kumar v. The District Collector and ors].In an order passed on June 13, a full bench of Justices GR Swaminathan, M Dhandapani, and K Murali Shankar, held that the term 'authorised officer' referred to under Sections 21(4), 22 and 23A of the 1957 Act, will also include police personnel."The implied affirmation, having obtained finality without being disturbed in any manner, the necessary inference that could be drawn is that the police personnel empowered under G.O. Ms. No.114 dated 18.9.2006 to be authorised officers u/s 21 (4) of the MMDR Act with the power to effect seizure is wholly within the framework of the MMDR Act and the Rules framed thereunder," the Court concluded. .The Court also held that if the police registers a First Information Report (FIR) against the offenders under the 1957 Act, as well as under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), they can compound the offences under the 1957 Act and proceed with prosecution for the IPC offences alone. The Court has also opined that, "An officer empowered to seize a vehicle under Section 21(4) of the Act would also be the best person to file the private complaint too under Section 22."However, the Court noted that, presently, if the authority seizing the vehicle is not a person authorised to file a private complaint under Section 22 of the Act, the appropriate course of action would be for the seizing authority to file a report and then have a person authorised under Section 22 file a private complaint. The Court proceeded to call for necessary government orders be issued so that officers authorised under Section 21 (4) of the Act also be authorised under Section 22 of the Act. "In the interest of justice and also in the interest of speedy trial, this Court suggests that the persons, who have been authorised u/s 21 (4) also be authorised u/s 22 as well so that there is no delay in the initiation of prosecution and speedy trial. The Government Orders, to that extent, shall be issued with requisite modification," the Court ordered. .In December last year, a division bench of the Madurai bench of the Madras High Court had sought constitution of a full bench to clarify whether police officers have the power to seize vehicles under the 1957 Act or whether such power was vested only upon revenue officials. A bench of Justices MS Ramesh and N Anand Venkatesh noted that the Court had passed an order on October 29, 2018 issuing a series of directions to the government for addressing the issue of illegal mining in the State. In that order, the Court had only recognised revenue officials as 'authorised officers,' who can seize vehicles and file private complaints after the seizure before the jurisdictional court..Following the said Court order, the State issued a Government Order (GO) on August 5, 2020, which stated that even police officials were empowered to seize vehicles under Section 21 (4) of the Act. .To address this conflict between the Court’s order and the GO, the judges had decided to refer the matter to a full bench for clarification. .Senior Counsel Vallinayagam and advocate S PalaniVelayutham appeared for the original petitioner S Kumar.Additional Advocate General, Veerakathiravan, and advocates P Thilak Kumar and N Dilip Kumar appeared for the respondent-State and Police authorities. Senior Counsel N Ananthapadmanabhan and advocate B Vijay were the amicus curiae in the matter..[Read Order]