The single judge dismissed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition challenging an order under Section 133 Cr.P.C. directing demolition of illegal construction on public pathways, holding that the matter relates to map correction and alternative remedies exist.
Writ petition dismissed with no force; stay order, if any, stands vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 41 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 34381 of 1994 Petitioner :- Jog Pal Singh & Another Respondent :- Iv Asj & Ohters Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Sagar Singh,P.K. Kashyap Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A.,D.S.Pandey,P.K. Singh,Sudhir Kumar Pandey,V.K. Jaiswal
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
1-Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sudhir Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no.3, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
2-This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners-Jog Pal Singh and Shyam Singh against the order dated 21.8.1993 passed by Pargana Magistrate/S.D.M., Ghaziabad, under Section 133 Cr.P.C., whereby illegal construction in Khasra No. 1190, measuring an area 461 square yards was directed to be demolished and opened for public pathways. Against that order, the petitioners filed Criminal Revision No.352 of 1993, which was dismissed vide order dated 7.10.1994 by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad.
3- Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the owner of Khasra Nos. 1187 and 1188 with respondent no.3-Bhopal Singh. Araji no.1190 is adjacent to Khasra Nos. 1187 and 1188 and in the garb of Araji no.1190, construction of the petitioners are being demolished showing wrong boundary.
4- It is admitted fact the order passed under Section 133 Cr.P.C. is related to Araji no.1190 upon which illegal construction was made on public pathways in that khasra was directed to be demolished.
5- Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that this writ petition has no force and is liable to be dismissed.
6- Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the matter is related to correction of map and without correction of map proceedings under Section 133 Cr.P.C. cannot be initiated.
7- Under the provision of Section 133 Cr.P.C. the Magistrate has absolute power to demolish the construction on public pathways. This Court will not decide the issue relating to ownership of disputed plot or other issues related with facts.
8- The petitioners have an alternative remedy to approach before the appropriate forum/ appropriate court for raising their grievances, if so advised.
9- The writ petition has no force and is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed.
10-Stay order, if any, stands vacated.
Order Date :- 29.8.2018/OP
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the order under Section 133 Cr.P.C. for demolition of illegal construction on public pathways has any force.
Whether the Magistrate has the power to decide issues related to ownership of the disputed plot under Section 133 Cr.P.C.
Whether alternative remedy exists before the appropriate forum for raising grievances regarding the demolition order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jog Pal Singh & Another
Village Asj & Others
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
