THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. versus M/S. VEDANTA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SESA STERLITE LIMITED) & ORS.

Citation: [2018] 3 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 06-03-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
v.
M/S. VEDANTA LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN
AS SESA STERLITE LIMITED) & ORS.
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 348-356 of 2018)
MARCH 06, 2018
[A. K. SIKRI AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.451 and 457 –
Disposal of seized property pending trial – Seizure of illegally
stocked iron ore – State filed application u/ss.451/457 CrPC seeking
permission to dispose off the seized iron ore by e-tender – Special
CBI Judge allowed the application vide order dated 08.05.2015 –
Against the order, writ petitions filed by respondents – High Court
allowed the writ petitions and directed release of the iron ore in
favour of the respondents – Propriety – Held: High Court while
allowing the writ petition had only relied on acceptance of the final
report by CBI Judge dated 15.12.2015 which was not relevant with
regard to order dated 08.05.2015 – Seizure of the iron ore was not
in case Crime No. 2/2014 in which final report has been accepted
by CBI Judge on 15.12.2015, rather seizure of the iron ore was in a
different proceeding in which   Order dated 08.05.2015 was passed
– When release of iron ore on an application filed by the State under
ss.451/457 CrPC was in a different proceeding, there was no effect
or consequence of acceptance of the final report vide Order dated
15.12.2015 in case Crime No. 2/2014 – High Court erred in allowing
the Writ Petition on the strength of the final report accepted on
15.12.2015 – However, it shall be open for the respondent to file
appropriate application before the Special CBI Judge for release
of seized iron ore – Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 – ss. 2(7)(b)(iv),
24(e), 62, 80 – Karnataka Forests Rules, 1969 – rr. 143, 162.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD : 1. It is clear that the final Report which was
accepted on 15.12.2015, was final report in case Crime No. 2/2014
which was registered after the investigation by SIT in pursuance
of order of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 562 of 2009 and
  [2018]  3 S.C.R. 1
1
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
2
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 3 S.C.R.
in the above case, no offence was found against the respondent.
Order dated 08.05.2015, on the other hand, was passed in different
proceedings which proceedings commenced by registration of
FIR dated 15.03.2010, Ankola Police Station Crime No. 189/2010.
[Paras 16, 18] [8-D-E; 9-G-H]
2.  Clearly seizure of the iron ore was not in case Crime
No. 2/2014 in which final report has been accepted on 15.12.2015
rather seizure of the iron ore was in different proceeding in which
proceeding Order dated 08.05.2015 was passed. When release
of iron ore on an application filed by the State under Section
451/457 Cr.P.C. was in different proceeding, there was no effect
or consequence of acceptance of the final report vide Order dated
15.12.2015 in case Crime No. 2/2014 and the High Court
committed error in allowing the Writ Petition on the strength of
the final report accepted on 15.12.2015.  High Court while allowing
the Writ Petition had only relied on acceptance of the final report
by CBI Judge dated 15.12.2015 which, was not relevant with
regard to Order dated 08.05.2015 passed by the trial court.  [Para
19] [10-F-H]
3. The order and judgment of the High Court is wholly
unsustainable and is hereby set aside. However, it shall be open
for the respondent to file an appropriate application before the
XXXII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special Judge
for CBI Cases, Bangalore (CCH-34), for release of seized iron
ore by establishing its existence and its ownership right over the
same, which may be considered by Jurisdictional Criminal Court
in accordance with law. [Para 21] [11-C-D]
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
Nos. 348-356 of 2018.
From the Judgment and Order dated 04.07.2017 of the High Court
of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ Petition No. 18941 of 2016
(GM-MM-S).
Basava Prabhu S. Patil, Sr. Adv, V. N. Raghupathy, Chinmay
Deshpande, Pariksith Angadi, Advs for the Appellants.
Dhruv Mehta, Ninad Laud, Jayant Mohan, Anjuman Tripathy, Ivo
D’Costa, Aditya Swain, Advs for the Respondent.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
3
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. 1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and
order of Karnataka High Court dated 04.07.2017 in Writ Petition No.
18941/2016 and Writ Petition Nos. 19328-19335/2016(GM-MM-S). High
Court vide its judgment dated 04.07.2017 has allowed the Writ Peti
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.