Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
MANIKKAN – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner requests a legal remedy for pathway obstruction. (Para 1) |
| 2. the court outlines the procedural requirements for the sub divisional magistrate under bnss. (Para 2) |
| 3. the court directs the appropriate decision on the complaint according to law. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner seeks for a direction inter-alia to dispose of Exhibit-P3 filed before the 2nd respondent.
1. Petitioner complains about certain obstructions to an alleged pathway leading to his house by the acts of the 5th respondent. The complaint was filed as Exhibit-
P3 before the 2nd respondent.
2. On a reading of Exhibit-P3, it is noticed that the same is in the nature of a petition filed under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.
When the 2nd respondent exercises the jurisdiction under Section 152 of BNSS , he stands in the position of a Sub Divisional Magistrate and the proceedings assume the character of a legal proceeding. Once the Sub Divisional Magistrate exercises jurisdiction under of , there are certain procedures that are required to be followed, including issuance of notice to the opposite side, verifying whether it is a public way or not and
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
