SHEO RATAN MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the basis of a report given by the Circle Officer, Majhouli, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bettiah passed conditional order requiring the 2nd party to remove obstruction from a public road. The 2nd party, objected to it and denied the existence of any such road or obstruction. After giving opportunity of hearing to both the party, the learned Magistrate, by order dated 23.6.2003 passed in Case No. 1055-M/2002, directed the 2nd party to remove the obstruction within fifteen days, failing which it was directed that the obstruction shall be removed forcefully. The 2nd party, aggrieved by the same, preferred Cr.Revision No. 160 of 2003, and the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah, by order dated 31st of January, 2004, allowed the revision application and set aside the order of the learned Magistrate.

(2.) THE Ist party, aggrieved by the same, has preferred this application.

(3.) IN spite of service of notice on opposite party Nos. 2 to 4, nobody has chosen to appear on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 but Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 4, however, contends that remedy under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not available to settle the dispute between the two individuals and as such, the revisional court rightly set aside the order of the learned Magistrate.