CHAIT RAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision, preferred by the revisionists under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) has been filed for quashing the judgment and order dated 19.7.2002 pased by the Sessions Judge, Rudraprayag in Criminal Appeal No. 4/2002, Chait Ram & Anr. v. State of Uttaranchal as well as for quashing the judgment and order dated 27.5.2002 passed by the SDM, Ukhimath, Rudraprayag in Case No. 7/2002, State v. Chait Ram & Anr. directing the revisionists to execute a bond for Rs. 5,000/- each with two sureties in the like amount for keeping peace for a period of one year.

(2.) In brief, the prosecution case is that Supervisor Kanoongo, Guptkashi submitted a chalani report dated 8.7.2001 before the SDM, Ukhimath in which he has stated that the complainant Nand Kishor, etc. and revisionists are the residents of the nearby villages and a public way runs form the village Sankri of the complainant to Guptkashi through Chauri Tok and the revisionists have obstructed the road by constructing a wall and by the illegal possession over the Govt. land they have planted the flowers and the crops on the abovesaid land. On 6.7.2001 in the presence of Panches and the complainant and the revisionist, the way was opened. This public way passes through the Govt. land. Thereafter the revisionists have further closed the abovesaid public way and with the help of the ladies of their family, they abused the complainant and threatened them for their life. Nearby the said land, Smt. Bicchna Devi also has her land and the revisionists are also threatening her and have abused her. In these circumstances, there are chances of the breach of law and order and also there are chances of committing some heinous crime by the revisionists, who are not working as per law and even they are not obeying the orders. The revisionists have again closed the way when it was opened by the revenue authorities.

(3.) On the basis of the abovesaid averments, the Supervisor Kanoongo, Guptkashi requested the Court for summoning the revisionists in the Court and ask them to furnish personal bonds and sureties to maintain the law and order. On the basis of this report, notices was issued to the revisionists under Section 111 CrPC. Thereafter the revisionists have come in the Court. Their statements were recorded under Section 251 CrPC.