2026:CGHC:8050 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2501 of 2019 Mohit Kumar Behra S/o Shri Chandan Behra Aged About 45 Years R/o Nichepara Dhramjaygarh, Police Station and Tahsil Dharamjaygarh, Civil and Revenue District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus

1. Narendra Singh S/o Shri Narayan Singh R/o Nichepara Dhramjaygarh, Police Station and Tahsil Dharamjaygarh, Civil and Revenue District :

Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

2. State of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate Raigarh, District :

Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Rishi Sahu, Advocate.

For Respondent No.2/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer.

Digitally s P i R g E ne E d T I by Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice PREETI KUMARI KUMARI Date:

2026.02.19

10:27:15 Order on Board +0530

13.02.2026

1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Patel, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. Sunil Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Rishi Sahu, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.1 as well as Ms. Palak Dwivedi, learned counsel for respondent No.2/State.

2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

“It is therefore, prayed that the Revision petition may kindly be allowed and the order impugned dated

27.10.2018 passed in Criminal Revision No.09/2018 may kindly be set aside and the appropriate order for removal of nuisance may kindly be passed by allowing the application under Section 133 Cr.P.C.

filed by petitioner, in the interest of Justice.”

3. The prosecution story, in short, is that the petitioner filed an application under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Dharamjaygarh on 25.08.2014, seeking removal of nuisance caused by respondent No. 1. The petitioner’s house is situated at Plot No. 148, area 29 Dismil, where he resides with his family. Adjacent to his house lies an open land belonging to respondent No. 1. The respondent dug a large pit/chamber in the said land for collection of raw/waste material, which resulted in stagnation of water and breeding of mosquitoes, thereby creating nuisance. Further, a Sagon (teak) tree situated near the boundary wall of the petitioner’s house posed a threat to the structure, as its roots could damage the wall and its leaves were regularly falling into the petitioner’s courtyard. The learned Magistrate registered the case on 08.10.2014, called for a report from the concerned Revenue Officer, and granted time to respondent No. 1 to file a reply. After receiving the report and reply, the matter was fixed for recording of evidence. The Revenue Inspector’s report (R.I. Prativedan) clearly indicates that respondent No. 1 had dug a large chamber near the petitioner’s boundary wall, which was causing nuisance and was capable of being removed.

4. The learned Magistrate, however, dismissed the application vide order dated 18.09.2017 on the ground that the land in question was recorded in the name of Smt. Malti Bai W/o Chandan, and the applicant’s/petitioner’s name was not reflected in the revenue records. The petitioner preferred a revision petition before the Court of Sessions challenging the order dated

18.09.2017 and prayed for appropriate directions for removal of the nuisance caused by respondent No. 1. However, the learned Revisional Court, without properly considering the Revenue Inspector’s report and other material available on record, held that the petitioner’s case did not fall within the purview of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and dismissed the revision petition vide order dated 27.10.2018.

Hence, the present petition.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed an application under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 along with relevant documents demonstrating that the respondent No.1 created nuisance near the petit