AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C.S.Dias, J
The revision petition is filed challenging the order passed in CMP No.5/2010 by the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Idukki, making the conditional order passed under Section 133 (1) (a) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Code (in short, ‘Code’), absolute under Section 138 of the Code.
As per the impugned order, the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate had restrained the revision petitioners from carrying out the quarrying operations in the property in question, on the ground that it was dangerous to the environment and disturbed the ecological balance.
The revision petition was filed as early as on 29.10.2010.
Heard; Sri. P.Sanjay, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners submitted that the revision petition has turned infructuous because the permit that was granted to the revision petitioners has expired. Therefore, even if the impugned order is vacated, the revision petitioners will not be in a position to carryout the mining activity. Hence, the revision petition may be dismissed as withdrawn. The said submission is recorded.
In the light of the above submission, I am of the view that nothing further survives in the revision petition.
Resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn.