SUDHAKARJHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 15-2-1992 passed by Sri C. S. Lal, Sessions Judge, Begusarai in Criminal Revision No. 4/92, whereby and whereunder he set aside the order dated 28-12-1991 passed by the S.D.M. Manjnaul in Case No. 202 (M) of 1991 converting the proceeding under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to that under Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) It appears that dispute between the parties is over a Nala which passes plot Nos. 1515 and 1516. It is alleged that refused water of the house of the petitioner is discharged through that Nala towards north but the same was blocked by the Opposite Party No. 2. The petitioner reported the matter to the Anchal Adhikari who got the matter enquired into by Halka Karamchari and also made an enquiry by himself and found that Nala was existing there since long and refused water of the petitioner was discharged through that Nala. He directed to the Co-operative Officer to get the obstruction removed and Nala re-constructed. On the report submitted by the Anchal Adhikari, Cheria Barrarpur, a proceeding under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was drawn up by the S. D. M. Manjhaul calling upon the parties to appear and show cause. In pursuance of the notice parties appeared and filed their show cause The S D. M. after perusing the show cause and hearing the counsel of both sides, converted the proceeding under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure into a proceeding under Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As against that the Opposite Party No 2 preferred Cr. Revision before the Sessions Judge, Begusarai who set aside the order of the S. D M by the impugned order stating that the relief sought for in the title suit was more comprehensive and that would cover the remedy available in the proceeding under Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As against that the petitioner has come up before this Court for quashing the same.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the learned Sessions Judge has mis-conceived and mis-interpreted the facts of the case. The refused water in the angan of the petitioner has created insanitation and that has posed a health hazard to the family members of the petitioner. There is eminent apprehension of breach of peace between the parties with regard to use of nala. The title suit is in its infancy stage and is not likely to be decided very soon. He also placed reliance in a Full Bench decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of Abdul Wahab Khan v. Mohd. Hamld Ullah, AIR 1951 Allahabad 238, wherein it has been held :-