Illegal mining: Specify number of FIRs filed in Ropar, High Court tells Punjab Police
Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, September 17
Digging deep into the issue of illegal mining in Ropar district, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has directed the Senior Superintendent of Police concerned to specify the number and details of the FIRs registered under the Mines and Minerals (Regulation of Development) Act.
In all, the high court has raised 17 queries for the police, the tehsildar and the district mining officer.
The direction by Justice NS Shekhawat came just about a fortnight after the Punjab Police was rapped for apparently being hand in glove with the persons carrying out illegal mining in the area.
Submit details of last 1 year
Submit details of all crime meetings held in the district in the last one year and the reasons for delay in noticing the fact that the owners of the illegal mining sites were not arrayed as accused in all 14 cases. —Justice NS Shekhawat, Punjab & Haryana high court
Justice Shekhawat has already made it clear that illegal mining was rampant in the district. The Mining Department has failed to perform its statutory duties and there was no effective supervision.
Even the SSP had not supervised the investigation of 14 FIRs, where Nangal tehsildar had not even bothered to supply information to the police station concerned, despite repeated requests.
As the case came up for a resumed hearing, Justice Shekhawat asked SSP Vivek Sheel Soni to share the date and number of communications sent by the Nangal police station to the revenue officials/tehsildar concerned in all 14 cases.
He was asked to specify the date of receipt of responses, if any, from the tehsildar/revenue officers. He was also asked to explain the reasons for any delay in conducting demarcations and receiving information regarding the owners of the sites of illegal mining in all 14 cases. Soni was further directed to clarify whether any owner of the mining site was arrayed as an accused in the 14 FIRs before September 1.
Information regarding any action initiated by the police against revenue officials failing to supply information despite repeated requests was directed to be included. Soni was further instructed to provide details of all crime meetings held in the district over the past year and the reasons for delay in noticing the fact that the owners of the illegal mining sites were not arrayed as accused in all the 14 cases.
The district mining officer, present in person before the court, was directed to file his personal affidavit, mentioning the number of check posts set up in the area and the designations of the officers heading the same. He was also asked to specify the effective steps taken by him to check the illegal mining in his district.
Justice Shekhawat also fixed the case for further hearing in October first week with a directive for Tehsildar Sandeep Kumar, District Mining Officer Harishant Kumar, and SSP Soni to remain personally present in the court.
