Back
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Pardhan Singh Jhouta – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present petition is directed to quash the order dated 25.7.2023, passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate(SDM), Jubbal and the proceedings pending against the petitioner.
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that a report was made to the Deputy Director, Animal Husbandry with a copy to Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Dhar stating that Pradhan Singh-respondent had obstructed the passage leading to the dispensary which was causing difficulty in approaching the dispensary. The respondent claimed that the land belonged to him; however, the land had been used as a passage by the public for 30-35 years. There is no alternative passage to the public. Secretary, Gram Panchayat wrote a letter to SDM, Jubbal stating that the passage was blocked, which was causing difficulty to the staff employed in the dispensary and the public. A request was made to take suitable action.
3. This letter was placed before the SDM with the noting made by the Reader. Learned SDM passed an order to seek a report from the Kanungo, Jubbal on the issue within three days. Field Kanungo submitted a report that he had carried out the demarcation and found
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of a formal conditional order before initiating proceedings under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. and the requirement for immediate measures t....
Section 152 BNSS requires proper conditional order, evidence inquiry before absolutism; spot inspection invalid substitute. Cannot compel private land use for public projects without acquisition; pro....
Proceedings under Section 133 Cr.PC require evidence of public nuisance; private disputes cannot be adjudicated under this provision.
The Magistrate must follow the mandatory procedure under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires the Magistrate to first question the person against whom the order is made wheth....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for reliable evidence in support of denial of public right and the burden of rebutting factual recitals.
Section 133 CrPC inapplicable to create passage on government playground absent proof of public way and hearing to owner; violates natural justice; civil suit appropriate remedy for passage rights.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a party cannot deny an encroachment after conceding the obstruction and seeking time for its removal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the scope and procedure of Sec. 133 of Cr.P.C. in addressing public nuisance and the requirement for recording reasons for administrative decisions....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
