PRATIMA TIWARI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against order dated 3.9.1983 recorded by Sri P.C. Agarwal, learned IlIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly in Criminal Revision Nos. 66 and 70 of 1983 by which he allowed both the revisions and set aside the order of learned City Magistrate, Bareilly in Criminal Case No. 54 of 1979, Km. Pratima Tiwari and Pramod Kumar and others allOwing the application of petitioner under Section 142 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The petitioner-revisionist is the Principal of school of Suraj Bhan Vidya Bhavan, situated in Chameli Ki Bagia, Nai Basti, Bareilly within Police Station Prem Nagar. About five hundred students were receiving their education in this school which was in existence for the last ten years prior to the filing of petition. Towards the west and east of the said school, the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 were manufacturing molasses through furnace by burning rice-husk as fuel as a result of which the entire atmosphere got polluted and the public institution was covered with smoke and volumes of particles of paddy and rice-busk which fall on the premises of the school and such smoke laden atmosphere and the particles were a great nuisance to the health and smooth study of the school children and teachers. On account of this great nuisance, it became impossible t:> run the institution in a healthy and peaceful state of atmosphere.

(3.) Learned Magistrate invited the police reports from Prem Nagar Police Station. The police supported the allegation of petitioner in their reports dated 3-3-1979 and 15-5-1979 which disclosed a great nuisance created by the burning of rice-husk in the furnance of the non- applicants. Thereafter on 14-6-1979, a conditional order was drawn by learned City Magistrate directing the opposite parties 2 and 3 to remove such nuisance by 26-6-1979 or to appear in his court to show cause why the conditional order may not be made absolute. The case was repeatedly adjourned. An application under Section 142 of Code of Criminal Procedure dated 10-7-1979 for an interim injunction was rejected by the learned Magistrate, on 6-9-1979. Another application was moved by the petitioner on 24-9-1981. Learned Magistrate made a local inspection and being satisfied about the enormity of the nuisance, issued such injunction on 29-9-1981. However, the matter was carried up in revision. Learned revisional court (Sessions Judge, Bareilly) quashed the aforesaid orders of learned Magistrate dated 29-9-1981 and 17-11981 and directed the Magistrate to rehear the matter.