HC directs govt to set up Special courts for mining cases

The district judges had submitted reports which indicated 943 illegal mining cases were pending in subordinate courts.

Published: 23rd February 2022 07:07 AM  |   Last Updated: 23rd February 2022 07:07 AM   |  A+A-

Orissa High Court. (File photo)

Orissa High Court. (File photo)

By Express News Service

CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has asked the State government to take expedient steps for establishment of special courts to ensure speedy trial of offences involving illegal mining.

A single-judge bench of Justice SK Sahoo on Monday underlined the necessity of such courts, considering the importance of mines in Odisha, revenue generated from it, and the increasing number of crimes reported under the MMDR Act.

Justice Sahoo said, “This court expects the State government to take necessary effective steps in that regard at the earliest in consonance with the provision under section 30-B of the Mines & Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 for constitution of special courts for speedy trial of offences”. 

The direction was given while adjudicating an anticipatory bail application filed by one Prasannajit Nayak in connection with a case involving theft of minor minerals. The case was registered under IPC and MMDR Act at the Jakhapura police station and was pending in the court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class.

In pursuance to an earlier order, the Advocate General had furnished a list of 545 illegal mining cases that were pending in different police stations across 30 districts. In Mayurbhanj, Keonjhar and Sundargarh districts, 99, 195 and 251 illegal cases had been registered respectively. 

The district judges had submitted reports which indicated 943 illegal mining cases were pending in subordinate courts. While stressing the need for special courts,

Justice Sahoo took into account the purpose of amendment made in the MMDR Act in 2015, particularly making stronger provisions for checking illegal mining and further fact that the penal provision had been made more stringent by prescribing higher penalties up to Rs 5 lakh per hectare and imprisonment up to five years.

The Advocate General had also made a positive statement before the court that the State government is not against the constitution of special courts under section 30-B of the MMDR Act, Justice Sahoo further said in his order.

He declined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant taking into consideration his criminal proclivity and the nature of accusation against him and vacated the interim protection granted to him on February 2 and extended further on February 15.


Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

flipboard facebook twitter whatsapp