Sign in

Illegal mining rampant in Punjab,Haryana: HC

The Punjab and Haryana high court has said that illegal mining is “rampant” in two states and not only causing losses to state exchequer but also causing “ecological disaster”.

Updated on: Mar 7, 2023, 24:25:42 IST
By , CHANDIGARH
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

The Punjab and Haryana high court has said that illegal mining is “rampant” in two states and not only causing losses to state exchequer but also causing “ecological disaster”.

While declining anticipatory bail to two accused persons, the high court said that all possible efforts must be made to curtail the same. (Representational Photo)
While declining anticipatory bail to two accused persons, the high court said that all possible efforts must be made to curtail the same. (Representational Photo)

While declining anticipatory bail to two accused persons, the high court said that all possible efforts must be made to curtail the same. The duo was roped in as an accused in an FIR registered on August 20, 2022 at Mallanwala police station in the district for illegal mining. They were owners of the trolleys recovered by mining officers from the spot of illegal mining in the area of the Sutlej river.

In high court they had argued that they were nominated as accused only on the basis of the disclosure statement of co-accused. Since the recoveries of the trolleys and JCB already stood effected, no case for custodial interrogation was made out, it was argued seeking interim protection from arrest.

The government counsel had argued that such offences were on the rise and for taking the investigation to its logical conclusion, the custodial interrogation was certainly necessary.

“Illegal mining is rampant across the state of Punjab and Haryana causing loss to the state exchequer on the one hand and being an ecological disaster on the other. Therefore, all possible efforts must be made to curtail the commissions of such offences,” the bench recorded denying the anticipatory bail. It said that nature of allegations were grave and there was need for custodial interrogation to take investigation to its logical conclusion.