Heard Sri Manmohan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the order dated 25.01.2021 passed by the Session Judge, Sultanpur in Criminal Revision No. 75 of 2020 (Sabhapati Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and others) filed under Sections 397, 399, 401 of IPC, which has been rejected by the court concerned as well as to quash the order dated 08.10.2020 passed in Case No.2415 of 2020 (Sabhapati Sharma Vs. Hari Prasad and another) passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Lambhua, Sultanpur filed by the petitioner under Section 133 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on an application moved by the applicant the proceedings of Section 133 Cr.P.C. were drawn by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lambhua, Sultanpur and vide order dated 08.10.2020 the same were illegally decided against the applicant. It is further submitted that on Revision being filed against the same order that has also been dismissed by the Sessions Judge vide order dated 25.01.2021 and the submissions of applicant were not considered in right perspective and, therefore, both the courts below have committed serious illegality and passed orders against settled principles of law. It is also submitted that the rejection of the application of the applicant by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lambhua, Sultanpur and the Revision by the Sessions Judge, Sultanpur is nothing but the abuse of process of law and both the orders are liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA on the other hand, submits that during the course of the proceedings of Section 133 Cr.P.C. a report was directed to be submitted by Naib Tehsildar to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lambhua, Sultanpur and the same was submitted by Naib Tehsildar, Lambhua and after considering the said report, it was observed that a public way is existing towards the eastern side of the house of the applicant which has not been obstructed and it is not possible to create a new 'way' in the Bhumidhari land of any tenure holder and on this score the Revisional Court also did not find any illegality in the order of the Magistrate and thus, there is neither any illegality nor any irregularity in the orders passed by courts below.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lambhua did not find any substance in the application of the applicant on the ground that a way is already available to him which is existing towards the east of his house and the same has not been obstructed. The Revisional Court also relying on the report of the Naib Tehsildar, did not find any illegality in the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Lambhua. Nothing has been brought to the knowledge of this Court which may reflect that any illegality or to say any irregularity has been committed by the trial Court or by the Revisional Court.
In view of above reasons as well as keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any illegality or to say any irregularity in the orders of both the Courts below thus, the instant application preferred by the applicant is hereby dismissed.
However, the dismissal of this application shall not preclude the applicant to avail other remedies available to him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 19.8.2021 Mohit