VIPUL SHARMA Vs. KALAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401, Cr.P.C. is directed against the order dated 13.12.1995 passed by the learned Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Sojat whereby the application filed by respondent No. 1 -Smt. Kalawati for being impleaded as p.y to the proceedings under Section 133, Cr.P.C. was allowed.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to this revision are that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 submitted an application under Section 133 Cr.P.C. before the learned Sub -Divisional Magistrate. Sojat and on that application an order under Section 133(1), Cr.P.C. was passed. In chose proceedings on 17.2.1994 an application was moved by respondent No. 1 Kalawati for being impleaded her as party respondent and the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate vide his order dated 13.12.1995 allowed that application. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 13.12.1995 passed by the learned Sub -Divisional Magistrate the petitioner has preferred this revision petition before this Court.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that there is no provision for impleading party to such proceedings under Section 133, Cr.P.C. In the matters relating to public nuisance, every citizen being interested, may participate in such proceedings. In the instant case also, respondent No. 1 moved an application that she apprehended that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 may not look -after the matter properly and so she may be allowed to be impleaded as party -respondent to these proceedings. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that proceedings under Section 133, Cr.P.C. are almost complete and by allowing respondent No. 1 to implead as party -respondent, it would result in unavoidable delay in its disposal and hence the order dated 13.12.1995 allowing the respondent No. 1 to be impleaded as party -respondent to these proceedings cannot be sustained.