This court dismissed a writ petition filed by a petitioner complaining of garbage accumulation near his house, which remained uncleared despite a representation. The court held the petition misconceived as the statutory remedy under Section 133 Cr.P.C. for public nuisance was available but not availed.
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. - 34
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 28481 of 2019
Petitioner :- Krishna Murari Gupta Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shri Krishna Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1.Heard Sri Krishan Mishra, learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.G.A. for State.
Order Date :- 17.9.2019 YK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable in view of the availability of alternative statutory remedy under Section 133 Cr.P.C. for public nuisance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Municipal Council, Ratlam vs Shri Vardhichand & OrsReferred¶8
Municipal Council, Ratlam vs Shri Vardhichand & Ors 1980 AIR 1622 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Krishna Murari Gupta
State Of U.P.
Sudhir Agarwal
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
