Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ram Lal – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. sewerage line obstruction claimed as public nuisance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. land rights versus public interest arguments. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. bnss s.152 mandates proper conditional order. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. pipeline refusal not statutory public nuisance. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. enquiry required; spot inspection not substitute. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. no power for utility disconnection orders. (Para 23) |
| 7. property deprivation needs compensation. (Para 24 , 25) |
| 8. sdm order quashed for procedural flaws. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioners have filed the present revision against the order dated 11.12.2024 passed by learned Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., vide which the conditional order passed under Section 152 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), was made absolute. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision are that residents of Upper Gangtoli made a complaint to the learned Sub Division
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....
The court emphasized that a conditional order under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. is mandatory for initiating proceedings, and failure to comply renders subsequent actions invalid.
The High Court can exercise inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to rectify jurisdictional errors, even when a second revision is barred under Section 397(3).
The supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 does not allow it to act as an appellate court; it corrects errors only when a grave injustice occurs due to procedural violations.
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....
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.
Removal of nuisance – If a proceedee does not perform act as warranted by conditional order or fails to appear and show cause against conditional order, he shall be liable to prosecution under Sectio....
Proceedings under Section 133 Cr.PC require evidence of public nuisance; private disputes cannot be adjudicated under this provision.
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
