BHAGWANT Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE HATA DISTRICT DEARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against an order passed by the Nyaya Panchayat convicting the petitioner for an offence under Section 290 of the Indian Penal Code and imposing a fine of Rs. 10/-. The Nyaya Panchayat further directed the petitioner to restore a public well which was alleged to have been unlawfully closed by the petitioner by filling up the same with wood, failing which the petitioner shall be liable to pay a fine of Re. 1/- till the petitioner restores the well. The petitioner also challenges the correctness of the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate affirming the order of the Nyaya Panchayat in the revision filed by the petitioner.

(2.) Three contentions were raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner; First, that the petitioner was not served with any notice of the date fixed for the trial of the case and consequently the entire proceedings held before the Nyaya Panchayat were null and void, second, that the offence was not triable by the Nyaya Panchayat inasmuch as the act complained of by the complainant did not constitute a public nuisance within the meaning of Section 268 of the Indian Penal Code which defines public nuisance. The third and the last submission was that in any case the order passed by the Nyaya Panchayat imposing a fine of Re. 1/- per day till the well was restored was clearly without jurisdiction inasmuch as the procedure laid down under section 100 of the Panchayat Raj Act was not followed in the present case.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel, I find no merit in the first and second contention. The third submission has considerable force and it has to be accepted.