RAMJI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the appli cation of certain inhabitants of village Kazipur Sarag, and after obtaining report from the police concerned, the Sub-Divi sional Magistrate, Mahmoodabad, acting under section 133, Cr.P.C., issued a notice to the applicants on 2nd of January, 1978, asking them to close down a brick-kiln set up by them in village Kazipur, else appear before him and show cause why the order should not be made absolute. The applicants appeared and contested the notice. ON 10-1-1978, the learned Magistrate passed an ad-interim order under section 142 (1) restraining the applicants from running the brick-kiln. Against the order, the applicants went in revision and failed. By means of this-application under section 482, Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed that, "that the Hon'ble court may be pleased to quash the proceedings under section 133, Cr.P.C. or vacate the injunction order issued under section 142 Cr.P.C. or pass such necessary order which the Honb'le court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case." In effect and substance, the prayer is that the order passed by the Magistrate 2-1-1978, under section 133, Cr.P.C., may be quashed and that if there be any difficulty in doing so, then his order dated 10-1- 1978 under section 142, Cr.P.C., only may be set aside. Obviously so, because if the order under section 133 Cr.P.C. fails, then the order under section 142, Cr.P.C. does not survive. Against the order dated 2-1- 1978, the applicants had a specified remedy by way of revision. They have not availed of it. They cannot in voke the inherent powers of the court under section 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing that order. For the principle is well settl ed that section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be pressed into service where a specific remedy is available under the Code. The principal prayer fails. Then comes the alternative prayer concerining the order of injunction dated 10-1-1978 under section 142 Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the applicants challenged the order on the following grounds:- 1. That the order was not passed at the time of making the conditional order under section 133(1), Cr.P.C., as required by law.

(2.) THAT the material before the Magistrate was not sufficient to justify the order.