RAM VISHAL SINGH Vs. RAM SAHAI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. K. Saksena, J. In a proceeding under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code), the petitioner, in response to a notice issued to him, denied the existence of public right of way on the land over which he had allegedly errected a gate. An application was given by Ram Sahai and others who had set the machinery in motion asserting that the obstruction has been caused in the public way by making a gate. It was alleged in that application that local inspection be made to assess the merit of the evidence. The prayer was accepted by the Magistrate by an order dated 18-6-1987, observing that for a proper appreciation of the evidence, it was necessary to make a local inspection. This order was assailed by means of a revision by the petitioner who was unsuccessful. The revision was dismissed on 20-10-1987.

(2.) THIS petition under Section 482 of the Code has been filed for setting aside the said orders and the entire proceedings instated under Section 133 of the Code.

(3.) POINTING out the stage at which the proceedings under Section 133 of the Code have reached, the learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the Magistrate was legally empowered to assess the merit and reliability of the evidence let in by the applicant in support of the devoid of right assetred by the public. He has urged that at that stage local inspection could not be made by the Magistrate. The contention is devoid of merit. In Section 310, itself it is mentioned, at any stage of the enquiry. Therefore, the law does not prescribe any stage for making local inspection. As a matter of fact, such bar cannot legally be imposed a court can at any stage for the appreciation of the evidence make local inspection. The further contention of the learned counsel is that the court could make local inspection suo motu but the opposite party has no right to move application in that respect. It is his submission in this continua tion that the Magistrate has erred in exercising his power and jurisdiction for making a local inspection on the application given by the opposite party who had no right to contest at that stage, Assuming, though with gest reluctance, that the public which was aggrieved by the alleged conduct of the petitioner was not legally competent to enter appearance and conteet at that stage, the question is that if some body pointed out the Magistrate to do a lawful act and the Magistrate did it for implementing a just cause, will the order become illegal My answer would be in the negative. The mere pointing by person for that a local inspection be made, would not render the order bad in law the Magistrate had jurisdiction and be rightly exercised it for an appreciation of the evidence given before him It is not worthy that this was done in the public interest also and even if some error was committed by the Magistrate. I would not interfere in exercise of inherent powers of this Court because the ends of justice do not require interference. The order for local inspection does not, therefore, suffer from infirmity. The revisional court rightly affirmed the order passed by the Magistrate.