RAJENDRA PURI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE is an old temple of Baba Darweshwar Nath in the heart of the city of Allahabad on the Jhonston Ganj Road in Mohalla Jhonston Ganj, Allahabad. On receipt of a report of the police that some 'gumtis' had been erected near the entrance door of the temple and also on the land around the temple used by the public at large for worship of the deities installed in the temple and that these constructions caused obstruction in the public right to perform Puja in the public temple, the City Magistrate, Allahabad, initiated proceedings in April, 1981, under section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') against the petitioner, Rajendra Puri and others, thereby passing a conditional order calling upon them to remove the unlawful obstructions from the public place and the land which was lawfully used by the public. The petitioner entered appearance and on being questioned, he denied the existence of any public right in respect of the disputed place. After an evaluation of the material laid before him, the Magistrate passed an order under section 137 (3) of the Code, observing that there was no reliable evidence in support of the denial. This order was challenged by the petitioner by means of a revision, which was allowed and the case was remanded by this Court with certain observations. Almost identical order was again passed and the petitioner preferred revision but was unsuccessful; the revision was dismissed by this court on 9-12-1982. This order was assailed by the petitioner by means of a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, which dismissed it and gave a month's time to the petitioner to file a civil suit for adjudication of title and obtain appropriate order from the Civil Court. A suit numbered as 1017 of 1983 has been filed in the name of the deity 'Baba Darweshwarnath Shivji' in the court of the Munsif (West), Allahabad for declaration that the deity is owner of the temple and the shops erected on open land duly managed by the petitioner, Sri Rajendra Puri and others is not a public property or place. THERE is yet another prayer to the effect that the criminal proceedings under section 133 of the Code (Criminal Case No. 8 of 1981 ; State v. Rajendra Puri and others) be declared ineffectual as against the rights of the plaintiff-deity and not binding on the plaintiff. Relief for permanent injunction has also been sought against the State of Uttar Pradesh and the District Magistrate, Allahabad arrayed as defendants 1 and 2, respectively, restraining them from demolishing the shops and interfering with the internal management of the temple.

(2.) AN ex-parte order was passed by the Munsif on 24-12-1983 for maintaining ' status-quo'. The City Magistrate, Allahabad, is proceeding for adjudication of the point which has to be considered while exercising the powers under section 138 of the Code. The prayer of the applicant to stay further proceedings was rejected by the City Magistrate by his order dated 11-4-1984.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the opposite-parties urged that the criminal court is competent to decide the question as to whether the erection of the gumtis has caused nuisance to the public at large and the opposite parties have a right to continue proceedings in the criminal court of competent jurisdiction, especially when it has not been taken away by any statutory provisions. He cited two decisions in support of his contention that the proceedings cannot be stayed; One is M. S. Sheriff v. State of Madras, AIR 1954 SC 397 and the other is Ram Narain Singh v. State of Utrar Pradesh, 1983 ACrR 186,