Anil Kumar Pahwa vs Passi Printing Press

V.S. Aggarwal, J.

This order shall dispose of Criminal Revision No. 574 of 1992 and Criminal Revision No. 375 of 1992.

A printing press under the name and style of M/s. Passi Printing Press is being run in residential House No. 11, Sector 19A, Chandigarh. A complaint had been made with the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chandigarh that due to running of the private printing press disturbance is caused. It is a public nuisance for the landlord and the people residing nearby. It is telling very badly upon their health and studies of the school and college going children. They cannot even sleep properly.

After recording evidence and considering the pleas the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chandigarh on 10.7.1991 concluded that due to running of the printing press in the garage of the house nuisance is being caused to the residents of the locality. It is injurious to the health and physical comfort of the people living in the adjoining houses, Under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the learned trial Court directed that running of the printing press be stopped forthwith and it be removed from the premises mentioned above within a period of 15 days.

The respondent preferred a revision petition. The learned Sessions Judge, Chandigarh on 12.2.1992 set aside the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chandigarh. It was held that the landlord had approached the Court after being unsuccessful after his attempt to the civil court. It was further concluded that clause (a) of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and clause (b) of the said section are not attracted. There is no finding that the printing press was a source of discomfort or injurious to the health of the residents. With these findings, the order of the trial court was set aside.

Aggrieved by the same, the present two revisions under consideration have been filed. Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which are relevant for the purposes of the present are being reproduced below for the sake of facility :

"(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 in consequence such trade or occupation should be prohibited or regulated or such goods or merchandise should be removed or the keeping thereof regulated; or"

It is apparent from the tenor of section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that proceedings are summary in nature. They are intended to enable the Magistrates to summarily deal with cases of urgency. Therefore, this Court has to act with all possible fairness. While Clause (a) of Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure refers to lawful obstruction or nuisance in a public place or from any river or channel, Clause (b) is applicable if the conduct of any trade or occupation is injurious to the health or physical comfort of the community.

It has been urged vehemently that besides the landlord, other residents of the locality have also complained about the running of the printing press being a nuisance.

To appreciate the said controversy, at the outset one can refer to the fact that Smt. Kamla Wati landlady had filed a petition for eviction against the tenant with respect to the same premises. The petition was disposed of by the learned Rent Controller, Chandigarh. One of the issues framed was as to if the respondent is a source of nuisance to the occupiers and neighbourers of the building. It transpired that the printing press was being of the sometimes since the year 1968. The findings on the said issues were in favour of the tenant respondent. An appeal was filed with the Appellate Authority and the same was dismissed. In other words, the findings of the Rent Controller, Chandigarh with respect to issue No. 3 were maintained.

It is apparent from the aforesaid that the printing press is being run on the said place for the past many years. An attempt by the landlord to get the property vacated by filing a petition for eviction had failed. In this background approaching the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chandigarh pertaining to the violation under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be appreciated.

In this regard reference can well be made to the decision of this Court in the case of Rattan Singh v. Mohinder Singh and others, 1973 CLR 278. In that case the dispute was about obstruction to a public place. Pertinent findings arrived at in that regard are reproduced below for the sake of facility :

"The provisions of Section 133, Criminal Procedure Code, cannot be allowed to be used as substitute for litigation in civil Court. The speedy and summary method for dealing with public nuisance and obstruction in case of emergency and imminent danger to public interest are provided in Chapter 10 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, if the obstruction had been allowed to stand on a public place without objection for many years then it is evident that there was no such emergency or imminent danger to the public interest, and the petitioner Mohinder Singh could seek his remedy in civil Court if so advised."

There is no reason as to why the logic and the ratio of this citation be not made applicable to the facts of the present case. There is no emergency or imminent danger to the public in the present case. The printing press has been running for the past many years. The authorities under the Rent Legislation have already come to the conclusion in favour of the respondent. Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, thus, cannot be allowed to be used not only a substitute for civil litigation but to overwrite the provisions. In the facts of the case, therefore, keeping in view the aforesaid, there is no ground to interfere in the order passed by the Sessions Judge, Chandigarh.

The revision petitions being without any merit must fail and are dismissed, as such.