Judgment Loknath Prasad, J. 1. Heard learned lawyer for the petitioner and the Counsel for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing the entire criminal prosecution relates to Jainagar P. S. Case No. 63/87 which has been instituted under Section 379, IPC and also under Rule 40 of the Bihar Minor Mineral Conca ion Rules, 1972. It was contended that Assistant Mining Officer, Kodar Instituted the aforesaid case as against the petitioner with allegation that 800 Cft. of stoue chips were illegally removed after extraction and so on the FIR lodged by the Assistant Mining Officer, a case under Rule 40 of the said Rules and also under Section 379, IPC was instituted and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted. 3. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that in view of Rule 40 of the Rules, extraction and removal is punishable under Rule 40. In that view of the matter, Section 379, IPC is not attracted and only Rule 40 of the Bihar Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1972 will apply. It was also contended that under Rule 42, offence is compoundable and so the petitioner compounded the offence punishable under the said Rule 40 by depositing the royalty, fine, cess etc. before the Assistant Mining Officer and the Assistant Mining Officer also informed the court concerned that is, the trial court that the offence had been compounded but still the trial court has not dropped the proceeding for the reason that Section 379, IPC will be applicable. 4. Admittedly the office under Rule 40 of the said Rules compoundable and admittedly the offences had already been compounded and fine etc. had been deposited and in view of the discussions made above, this case is only under Rule 40 of the said Rules and Section 379, IPC is not applicable In that view of the matter, the court below was not justified for proceeding with the case. Accordingly this application is allowed and the order dated 28-1-95 passed in Jainagar P. S. Case No. 63/87 (R. No. 168/94) and the entire criminal prosecution relates to the said case, as against the petitioner, is hereby quashed.