MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE Vs. ROOP DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals (Crl. Appeal Nos. 62 and 63 of 1967) raise a common question and indeed arguments have been addressed only in Municipal Commitcfe, Rampur v. Roop Dass, Crl. Appear No. 62 of 1967. Order in this appeal would thus dispose of Crl Appeal No. 63 of 1967 as well.

(2.) Facts of Cr] Appeal 62 of 1967 may alone be stated

(3.) The Municipal Committee, Rampur, through its Secretary presented a complaint in the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Rampur under sections 172(1) and 219 of the Panjab Munieipal Act as applied to Himachal Pradesh. The complanant committee averred in the complaint that the accused Roop Dass had made the additions and alterations in the structure of his shop and had raised the roof of the same in spit- of the fact that he had been informed on 10th March, 1967 the decision of the committee about the refusal of sanction to effect the additions and alterations in the structure of his shop. The accused had also been served with a notice in March, 1967 for stopping the work and was reminded about the refused sanction. The accused had also, according to this complaint constructed stone steps to his shop from the Municipal lane without the permisson of the Municipal Committee as required under section 172(1) of the aforesaid Act. These two offences were stated to be punishable under section 219 and section 172(1) of the aforesaid Act. On 21st June, 1967, the learned Magistrate fixed 11th July, 1967 as the next date of hearing and summoned the accused for that date. Apparently, this order was made in the absence of the representative or the counsel of the complainant municipal committee because the order directs that the representative of the Municipal Committee should also be informed of this date. On 11th July, 1967, the following order was passed by Shri Surat Singh Thakar, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rampur Bushahar :-