IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
Pardhan Singh Jhouta - Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and Others - Respondents
Cr. MMO No. 793 of 2023
Decided On : 05-01-2024
Obstruction - Public Path - Section 133 of Cr.P.C. - 133, 135, 137, 138, 142 of Cr.P.C. - The court discussed the provisions of Section 133 of Cr.P.C. and emphasized the necessity of a formal conditional order before initiating proceedings. It highlighted the importance of conducting inquiries in the presence of the respondent and the requirement to record separate statements of involved parties. The court also emphasized the need for immediate measures to prevent imminent danger or injury of a serious kind to the public before passing an injunction order under Section 142 of Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the order passed by the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM) regarding obstruction to a public path and the subsequent criminal proceedings. The respondent had allegedly obstructed a passage leading to a dispensary, which was causing difficulty to the public and dispensary staff. The petitioner claimed ownership of the land and challenged the SDM's order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the SDM erred in initiating proceedings under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. without passing a formal conditional order and conducting an inquiry in the absence of the respondent. It also noted that the SDM's order lacked the necessary immediate measures to prevent imminent danger before issuing an injunction order under Section 142 of Cr.P.C. The court set aside the SDM's order and remitted the matter for further proceedings.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the proper application of Section 133 of Cr.P.C., the necessity of a formal conditional order, conducting inquiries in the presence of the respondent, and the requirement for immediate measures before passing an injunction order under Section 142 of Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of a formal conditional order before initiating proceedings under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. It highlighted the necessity of conducting inquiries in the presence of the respondent and the requirement for immediate measures to prevent imminent danger before issuing an injunction order under Section 142 of Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the petition, set aside the SDM's order, and remitted the matter for further proceedings strictly as per law.
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 that the passage was blocked on the Government land bearing Khasra No. 1286/1, measuring 00-03-03 hectares. Pradhan, Up-Pradhan and the local public stated that the people used the passage, which was blocked by Pradhan Singh-respondent. Respondent had also encroached upon Khasra No. 1286/1, measuring 00-03-03 hectares. A tatima of the encroachment was prepared. A noting was prepared by the Reader that as per the report, the passage was blocked by Pradhan Singh and it was appropriate that action should be taken against him under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. Learned SDM ordered that as the status quo had been ordered by the learned JMIC in the matter; hence the orders passed on the next date of hearing should be awaited.
4. The file was again put up with the noting by the Reader that the status-quo order had been vacated; hence, the file was placed for further orders. Learned SDM passed an order “Institute case under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. and conditional order for removal of nuisance within seven days. The next date of hearing be fixed for 17.7.2023.” The respondent appeared and submitted a reply. The notices were issued to Pradhan, Vice-Pradhan, Secretary, and Veterinary Pharmacist, returnable for 25.7.2023. On 25.7.2023, none appeared on behalf of the respondent whereas the witnesses were present. Learned SDM held that from the perusal of the statements of all present, it was evident that there was a dire need to restore the path. An interim order under Section 142 of Cr.P.C. was passed as per the separate detailed order. Copy of the order was ordered to be sent to the respondent, Tehsildar, Jubbal, SHO, Jubbal for compliance.
5. Being aggrieved from the order passed by learned SDM, the present petition has been filed asserting that the petitioner is a co-owner in possession of the land bearing Khasra Nos. 1279 and 1284. This land was acquired by his ancestors as per the provisions of Himachal Pradesh Nautor Rules, 1968. The Department has no right over the land. The Government proposed the construction of an Ayurvedic Dispensary on the adjacent land in the year 2016. The Government also proposed the construction of a Veterinary Dispensary in the year 2017. There is a private building next to the Government land in which the Ayurvedic Dispensary and Veterinary Dispensary have been functioning since 1982. There is a pre-existing path in the land of Smt. Sushma Sohta, Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat and Lovely Sohta, Ward Member adjacent to the land of the respondent. The construction material was taken through the pre-existing path. They approached the SDM to divert the path through the land of the respondent. SDM, Jubbal called the respondent on 15.5.2023 at 11.00 AM and asked him to be present on the spot. The respondent reached the spot. SDM and other perso
T.P. Rajeevan vs. Sub Divisional Magistrate and Another
Kartika Ram vs. Jagan Nath Mishra
C.A. Avarachan v. C.V. Sreenivasan
Mangal and other Vs. State of U.P. and others 1977 CrLJ 1036
AI
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....
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.