BHASKAR BRIJWASI Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER
LAWS(UTN)-2013-10-113
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on October 28,2013

Bhaskar Brijwasi Appellant
VERSUS
State of Uttarakhand and another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The applicant, by way of present petition/application moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeks to quash the order dated 19.11.2008 in the Criminal Case No. 11/2 of 2006 passed by the City Magistrate, Haldwani, and the order dated 15.01.2010 passed in Criminal Revision No. 02 of 2009, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, /Fast Track Court, Haldwani, District Nainital.
(2.) Respondent no. 2 moved an application under Section 133 Cr.P.C. against the applicant and another in the Court of City Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital on 29.06.2005. City Magistrate, Haldwani vide order dated 30.12.2010 directed the second party, i.e., Bhaskar Brijwasi to remove nuisance after receiving report of the Police Officer and on taking evidence. It is informed by the learned counsel for the respondent that the said encroachment has not been cleared by the second party, i.e., applicant in the instant case.
(3.) Earlier, the City Magistrate, Haldwani, vide order dated 19.11.2008, directed the second party (applicant herein) to remove obstructions from gool(water channel) and lane. Final order was passed on the said date. It was also directed to issue notice under Section 141 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved against the same, a Criminal Revision was preferred, which was decided by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ 1st FTC, Haldwani on 15.01.2010. Learned Revisional Court did not agree to the contention of the revisionist that the disputed land was a private land and not a public land. Learned Revisional Court also did not agree to the contention of the revisionist that the parties ought to have decided their dispute, being a private dispute, in the Civil Court. Learned revisional court relied upon the report of Naib Tehsildar. Learned revisional court was also of the view that due opportunity of hearing was given to the revisionist by the learned City Magistrate. The revision was accordingly dismissed. Aggrieved against the same, present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was preferred.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.