RAVI KUMAR Vs. NARINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD and gone through the record.

(2.) PETITIONER, who has been named as respondent in two complaints, Annexures P-1 and P-2, submitted to the District Magistrate, for taking action, on account of obstruction of flow of water, in a Khad (rivulet) and diversion of water of that Khad, towards lands and buildings of the signatories to the two complaints, is aggrieved by order dated 3.7.2010, passed by S.D.M., Una on those complaints, as also the subsequent proceedings conducted by him and, therefore, he has approached this Court, by means of the present petition, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing the aforesaid order, dated 3.7.2010 and the proceedings, initiated on the basis of aforesaid two complaints.

(3.) LEARNED counsel, representing the petitioner, submits that when the complaints had been submitted to the District Magistrate, he ought to have passed orders thereon, in accordance with the provisions of Section 133 Cr.P.C. and that he had no jurisdiction or authority to mark the complaints to SDM. Submission requires outright rejection, in view of the provisions of Section 23 Cr.P.C., which gives statutory power to the District Magistrate, to distribute the work among his subordinate Executive Magistrates. SDM is, admittedly, an executive Magistrate, subordinate to the District Magistrate.