learned Counsel submitted that admittedly, the cattle shed as well as surrounding area, where the petitioner and the other neighbourers are residing, cannot be said to be a public place and thus, even assuming that there was any nuisance caused, the same cannot be termed as a public nuisance, so as to confer jurisdiction on the learned Magistrate to act under Section 133 of the Code. The learned Counsel was at pains to point out that none of the neighbourers has come forward to support the case of the petitioner that the user of the cattle shed was posing a nuisance and health hazard. He submitted that the evidence of the Medical Officer would show that the cattle shed was at a distance of about 11 metres from the house of the petitioner and the Medical Officer had opined that only if there is soak pit for disposal of the liquid waste, the alleged nuisance can be taken care of. The learned Counsel submitted that the Investigating Officer has not recorded the statements of any of the neighbourers, which would strike at the very root of the veracity of the report as also the evidence of the said witness. He, therefore, submitted that the impugned judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge is perfectly legal and proper and does not call for any interference. On behalf of the first respondent, reliance is also placed on the decision of Chatrapati Shivaji Co-operative Housing Vs. The State of Maharashtra , reported in 1968 Mh.L.J. Vol. 6, 909
