ANANDLAL DOSABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference made by the learned Sessions Judge at Jamnagar arises out of an order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class Jamnagar in Summary Case No. 1000/69 convicting one Anandlal Dosabhai for having committed offences under secs. 177 and 193 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963 hereinafter referred to as the Act and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 15/under each count read with sec. 227 of the Act. In default of payment of fine Anandlal was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five days.

(2.) Anandlal was the owner of house bearing S. No. 829 in ward No. 15 Digvijay Sheri No. 50 Jamnagar and one Mohanlal Madhavji Vithlani was his tenant staying on the upper floor of the said house. As it was found by the Municipal Inspector that dirty water was thrown on the street which stagnated and created a public nuisance a notice dated 16 October 1968 was issued against the owner Anandlal directing that drain pipes be fixed on the two spouts from which the dirty water was being thrown on the street.; He was also charged with having caused or allowed dirty water to flow spouts and stagnate on the public street causing a public nuisance. The prosecutions were filed on the ground that the owner as well as the tenant had failed to carry out the directions contained in the-notice issued.

(3.) The contention of Anandlal was that he had purchased the pipes and tried to fix them by engaging a mason but tenant Mohanlal Madhavji prevented him from entering the premises in his possession and from fixing the pipes. Therefore he had not committed any offence under sec. 177 of the Act. With respect to charge under sec. 193 of the Act he contended that he had not `allowed the water to be discharged from the spouts as he was not in the control of the premises occupied by the tenant and he was unable to prevent him from discharging dirty water from the spouts and therefore he was not liable to be convicted for the alleged offences. The learned Magistrate rejected the contentions of Anandlal and convicted him of both the charges.