Karnataka High Court
M.L.GOPALASWAMY - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MYSORE - Respondent
Decided On : 06-29-73
Cr.R.P. : 118 of 1973
S. 133 Crpc - Restoration of waste weir - The court set aside the final order and directed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to take evidence and then proceed to pass the final order.
Fact of the Case:
The Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed a preliminary order under s. 133 Crpc, calling upon the petitioner to restore the waste weir and close the pit, but the petitioner filed objections and failed to appear before the Magistrate.
Finding of the Court:
The final order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot be sustained as the Magistrate did not take evidence before passing the final order.
Issues: Failure of the petitioner to appear before the Magistrate, lack of evidence before passing the final order.
Ratio Decidendi: A Magistrate is bound to take evidence before passing the final order under S. 137 Crpc, and the conditional order cannot be made absolute without legal evidence.
Final Decision: The court set aside the final order and directed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to take evidence and then proceed to pass the final order.
( 2 ) THE petitioner appeared before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and filed his objections on 27-11-1972 stating among other things that he had not committed any nuisance and. even if he had committed those acts under the mining lease he had unfettered powers to deal with the waste weir and finally stated that he had not obstructed any water course and the waste weir had been left intact and if there was any dispute, it was of cvil nature. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate thereafter directed the petitioner to appear before him along with witnesses and documents in support of his case.
( 3 ) HE posted the case from time to time but the petitioner did not appear before him. Therefore the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed an order under S 137 Crpc read with S. 137a Crpc making the preliminary order absolute. Aggrieved by this decision, the petitioner has preferred this petition.
( 4 ) UNDER S. 137 Crpc a Magistrate is bound to take evidence as basis for the order he has to make. The conditional order cannot be made absolute when the party, namely, the complainant being called upon to substantiate the allegation which necessitated the passing of the conditional order without legal evidence did not appear. When a party against whom a conditional order is made, appears and shows cause, the Magistrate is bound to take evidence produced by him. But if he does not produce evidence, it is still incumbent on the Magistrate to record evidence of the complainant and others if any and then pass the final order under Sec. 137, crpc; that not having been done in this case, the final order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot be sustained. I, therefore set aside the final order and direct the Sub-Divisional magistral to take evidence and then proceed to pass the final order.
--- *** ---
.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.