Allahabad High Court
Ram Sajiwan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 November, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has filed the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the relief which has been mentioned in the prayer clause of the application.
2. The relief which has been mentioned in the application is delineated below:-
"i. allow this instant application.
ii. quash the Judgment and order dated 22.10.2024 (vide Annexure No. 1 to the affidavit), passed by the Additional Session Judge, 1 Court No. 1, Basti, in Criminal Revision No. 86 of 2024, CNR No. UPBS010007542024, (Ram Sajiwan vs. State of U.P. and another) under Section-133 Cr.P.C., and order dated 16.11.2023, (vide Annexure No. 2 to the affidavit), in Case No. 9303/2018, CNR. No. T201817140309303 (Ram Shankar Vs. Ram Sajiwan) passed by Additional Sub Divisional Magistrate, Basti, Under Section 133 Cr.P.C.,
iii. stay the Judgment and order dated 22.10.2024 (vide Annexure No. 1 to the affidavit), passed by the Additional Session Judge, 1st Court No. 1, Basti, in Criminal Revision No. 86 of 2024, CNR No. UPBS010007542024, (Ram Sajiwan vs. State of U.P. and another) under Section-133 Cr.P.C., and order dated 16.11.2023, in Case No. 9303/2018, CNR. No. T201817140309303 (Ram Shankar Vs. Ram Sajiwan) passed by Additional Sub Divisional Magistrate, Basti, Under Section 133 Cr.P.C.,"
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in respect of the land which is in question, two civil suits have been filed but there is no interim order and the suits are still pending, yet no evidence has been produced by any parties. He further submits that there are several judgments of hon'ble Supreme Court and hon'ble High Court, which prevent passing of any order under Section 145 Cr.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has annexed a notice dated 11.02.2016 at Annexure No. 4, in which the date of Challani report has been mentioned as 22.11.2015, the same has not been annexed in the paper book. As per the notice dated 11.02.2016 issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Basti, it is clear that the dispute is in respect of a Well which is used by the villagers on auspicious occasions, i.e., marriage etc. and the applicant is causing nuisance by digging the land near the area and constructing toilet (Sauchalaya) which will cause obstruction in the use of the Well by the public at large. The notice dated 11.02.2016 is being pasted below:
5. As per Section 133 Cr.P.C., it has been mentioned that nuisance can be removed by the Executive Magistrate/Sub-Divisional Magistrate, if there is any unlawful obstruction or nuisance at any public place, any way, river, channel and can fence any tank, Well or excavation adjacent to any such way or public place in such a manner as to prevent danger arising to the public. The provision of Section 133 is delineated below:
"Section 133 Cr.P.C., Conditional order for removal of nuisance.
(1) Whenever a District Magistrate or a Sub-Divisional Magistrate or any other Executive Magistrate specially empowered in this behalf by the State Government, on receiving the report of a police officer or other information and on taking such evidence (if any) as he thinks fit, considers
(a) that any unlawful obstruction or nuisance should be removed from any public place or from any way, river or channel which is or may be lawfully used by the public; or
(b) that the conduct of any trade or occupation, or the keeping of any goods or merchandise, is injurious to the health or physical comfort of the community, and that such trade or occupation should be prohibited or regulated, or such goods or merchandise should be removed or the keeping thereof regulated; or
(c) that the construction of any building, or the disposal of any substance, as is likely to occasion conflagration or explosion, should be prevented or stopped; or
(d) that any building, tent or structure, or any tree is in such a condition that it is likely to fall and thereby cause injury to persons living or carrying on business in the neighbourhood or passing by, and that in consequence the removal, repair or support of such building, tent or structure, or the removal or support of such tree, is necessary; or
(e) that any tank, well or excavation adjacent to any such way or public place should be fenced in such manner as to prevent danger arising to the public; or
(f) that any dangerous animal should be destroyed, confined or otherwise disposed of,
such Magistrate may make a conditional order requiring the person causing such obstruction or nuisance, or carrying on such trade or occupation, or keeping any such goods or merchandise, or owning, possessing or controlling such building, tent, structure, substance, tank, well, excavation, or animal, or tree, within a time to be fixed in the order
(i) to remove such obstruction or nuisance; or
(ii) to desist from carrying on, or to remove or regulate in such manner as may be directed, such trade or occupation; or
(iii) to remove such goods or merchandise; or
(iv) to prevent or stop the construction of such building, or to alter the disposal of such substance; or
(v) to remove, repair or support such building, tent or structure, or to remove or support such tree; or
(vi) to fence such tank, well or excavation; or
(vii) to destroy, confine or dispose of such dangerous animal in the manner provided in the said order,"
or, if he objects so to do, to appear before himself or some other Executive show cause, in the manner hereinafter provided, why the order should not be made absolute.
(2) No order duly made by a Magistrate under this section shall be called in question in any civil court.
Explanation. A "public place" includes also property belonging to the State, camping grounds and grounds left unoccupied for sanitary or recreative purposes.
6. Learned Executive Magistrate after giving opportunity of hearing to the applicant passed a detailed order on 16.11.2023 mentioning that in the interest of justice/public at large only 10 feets width encroachment around the Well is removed treating as nuisance.
7. The applicant has preferred revision against the order dated 16.11.2023 passed by the Executive Magistrate, in the Criminal Revision No. 86 of 2024 (Ram Sajiwan v. State of U.P. and others), the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Basti, has also provided opportunity of hearing to all the parties and thereafter dismissed the revision vide order dated 22.10.2024.
8. This Court finds that the Abadi area which is mentioned in the revenue map as Well as on the revenue record is used by all the villagers and the Well constructed long back in the Abadi is used by the public, therefore, no obstruction can be created around the Well, therefore, passing an order to the extent of 10 feets width around the Well for the public usage by the Executive Magistrate as per provision of Section 133 and the order passed by the revisional court confirming the order of the Executive Magistrate is in accordance with law and needs no interference by this Court.
9. Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
10. This order shall be communicated by the Registrar (Compliance) to the Executive Magistrate, Sadar, Basti, to intimate the Village Pradhan, Village- Hathiyawan Khurd, Prithivipur, Police Station.- Lalganj, District- Basti, so that no hindrance may be caused for using that very Well, which is used by the public.
