2025:UHC:2019 1 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 2202 of 2023 21 March, 2025 Kamleshwar Prasad Dobhal --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Another --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Anurag Bhatt and Mr. Sourab Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned A.G.A. with Mr. Vipul Painuli and Ms. Sweta Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent No.1. Mr. Dharmendra Barthwal, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rejoinder affidavit filed by the applicant is taken on record. Miscellaneous application (IA/4/2025) made therefor, is allowed. 3. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is being heard and decided finally. 4. By means of the present C482 application, applicant has put to challenge the impugned notice/ order dated 01.09.2022 in Criminal Case No.09 of 2022 State through Inspector Incharge, Police Station Munikireti, Tehri Garhwal Vs. Kamleshwar Prasad Dobhal, pending before the Court of learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal, under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred to as Cr.P.C.) and the entire proceedings of aforementioned criminal case. 2025:UHC:2019 2 5. The facts in nutshell are that the applicant and respondent No.2 are immediate neighbours and both have filed cases under Section 133 Cr.P.C. in the Court of learned SDM, Narendranagar, Tehri Garhwal. The applicant on the grounds that respondent No.2 had constructed a window on the wall facing towards the bath/washroom of the applicant which invaded his and his family members' privacy, while respondent No.2 on the grounds of damping his wall thereby endangering public safety, launched the proceedings u/s 133 Cr.P.C. 6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that respondent No.2 has time and again in spite of an agreement between them, not to encroach each other's land, has renovated his house multiple times, thereby, breaching the agreement. He further submits that respondent No.2 has recently constructed a window facing applicant's washroom and thereby, invading his privacy, due to which, the applicant was forced to approach learned SDM, Narendranagar, Tehri Garhwal. 7. He further submits that in counterblast to the aforesaid proceedings, respondent No.2 approached the learned SDM, Narendranagar, Tehri Garhwal under Section 133 of Cr.P.C. and learned SDM after reports from concerned authorities was pleased to pass the impugned order/notice, whereby, the learned SDM has directed the applicant to remove the nuisance allowing the respondent No.2 to do plaster on the disputed wall or to show cause that why the said order be not made absolute. 2025:UHC:2019 3 8. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the issue involved is civil in nature and only involved two parties, therefore, no "danger to public” was there and learned SDM has erred in initiating Section 133 Cr.P.C. proceedings. 9. Learned State Counsel in its counter affidavit stated that the report submitted by the police revealed eminent threat of collapse of a wall, thus, endangering life of public at large including the respondent No.2 and his family members. Hence, the impugned order was rightly passed under Section 133 of Cr.P.C., for protection of life and well being of public at large. 10. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 in its counter affidavit stated that the applicant is a person of quarrelling nature and has restricted him from plastering his wall and further has done various things, which have resulted in further dampening of his wall and the wall to get into a dilapidated condition, which can now fall any time, thus, endangering the life and property of the persons living nearby. 11. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated in its rejoinder affidavit that respondent No.2 has presented twisted facts before this Court, thereby trying to mislead the Hon'ble Court. He further submits that the proceedings initiated are nothing but colourable exercise of power by the State Authorities to settle a purely civil dispute. 12. After perusing the entire material available on record and having gone through the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the matter involved in the present C482 2025:UHC:2019 4 application is of a civil nature and between two parties, therefore, this Court should interfere with the proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Impugned Order/Notice dated 01.09.2022 passed by learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Narendra Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal, in Criminal Case No.09 of 2022 State through Inspector Incharge, Police Station Munikireti, Tehri Garhwal Vs. Kamleshwar Prasad Dobhal, pending before the Court of under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as well as the entire proceedings of aforesaid criminal case, are hereby quashed. 13. Accordingly, the present C482 application is allowed. However, the parties are at liberty to settle their dispute under relevant private laws, by filing civil suits. 14. Interim order dated 09.11.2023 stands vacated. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 21.03.2025 PN