Delhi District Court
Pandit Virender vs . The State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 8 May, 2014
Pandit Virender Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
CR No. 73/14
IN THE COURT OF SH. ANIL KUMAR:
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE05 : DWARKA COURTS : DELHI
In the matter of:
Criminal Revision No. 73/14
Pandit Virender
S/o Shri Tara Chand
R/o WZ157, Raj Nagar PartII,
Palam Colony, New Delhi110045. ...Revisionist
Versus
1. The State
(NCT of Delhi).
2. ACP, Dabri
SouthWest District ... Respondents
Date of filing of revision : 10.09.2012
Date of Advancing Arguments : 06.05.2014
Date of Judgment : 08.05.2014
Present: None for the petitioner.
Shri Aditya Kumar, Ld. Addl. P.P.for the State/ respondent no.1.
None for respondent no. 2 Arguments in the present revision petition were already heard on the last date of hearing.
Page no. 1/5 08.05.2014 Pandit Virender Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
CR No. 73/14I have perused the entire record, including TCR carefully.
:O R D E R :
1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of the present revision petition filed by the petitioner under Section 397 (1) Cr.P.C against the conditional order/impugned order dated 11.06.2012 passed by Ld. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Najafgarh, SouthWest District and also against the arbitrariness on behalf of the Delhi Police in not granting permission to abide by the conditions as passed in the impugned order against the petitioner.
2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of the present revision petition are that petitioner is a Mahant and manages daily affairs of the temple i.e. Prachin Bada Hanuman Mandir situated at WZ157, Gali No.3, Raj Nagar PartII, Palam Colony, New Delhi110045 and there are large number of devotees and there is daily congregation for religious prayers, kirtan etc. during which speakers, public address system and other musical instruments are used within the permissible noise levels during the day time i.e. 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m. One of the neighbours having some grievances with regard to the activities of the temple activities of the temple filed a complaint under Section 133 Cr.P.C. before the Ld. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Najafgarh, S/W District alleging Page no. 2/5 08.05.2014 Pandit Virender Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
CR No. 73/14that nuisance being created due to temple activities and Ld. SDM called report from the local police and halka patwari of the concerned area and after perusing the report opined that the petitioner is causing public nuisance by using loud speakers, for kirtans, at higher pitch and also that large number of vehicles are being parked in the lane adjoining the temples and also that unauthorized shops/vendors exist, in front of the Mandir, are causing nuisance to public, therefore, passed the conditional order/impugned order against the petitioner and directed not to use the loud speaker, dholaks, harmoniums etc. in the Mandir without the permission of the concerned ACP, Delhi Police and the same should be as per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, judgment dated 18.07.2005 in WP No. 78/1998. Abiding the impugned order of the Ld. SDM, petitioner made several representations before the ACP, Delhi Police to normally resume the activities of the Mandir and to use the musical instruments and speakers for conducting kirtans inside the Mandir but ACP, Delhi Police refused to grant the permission.
3. Petitioner has assailed the impugned order on the ground that ACP (Dabr) has failed to appreciate the order of Ld. SDM and wrongly observed that order seeks discontinuation from use of loud speakers, dholaks, harmoniums etc. whereas a direction is Page no. 3/5 08.05.2014 Pandit Virender Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
CR No. 73/14made to the petitioner to get the permission to use the abovesaid instruments within the permissible limits as stated in "The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control)Rules, 2000" as per the guidelines enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgement dated 18.07.2005 in WP No.78/1998. It is further alleged that the ACP has failed to appreciate that the impugned order does not prohibit the use of musical instruments and also erred in observing that direction is given to Delhi Police to ensure compliance of the order with regard to the use of the aforesaid instruments within the permissible limits by the petitioner and not to bar the petitioner from using the same. It is further alleged that the ACP has failed to appreciate that the impugned order is not a final order but a conditional order compliance of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and further that the nuisance created by the shops/vendors and congestion caused due to parking of vehicle is not made due to the activities of Mandir but due to lack of parking space and as far as unauthorized shops/ vendors are concerned, vide the impugned order, Executive Engineer, MCD, Najafgarh was also directed to remove the unauthorized public structure/shops, if found to be encroaching the lane/public passage.
4. Perusing contents of present revision I have no hesitation Page no. 4/5 08.05.2014 Pandit Virender Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
CR No. 73/14to say that this revision has been shown to be filed against the order of SDM/Executive Magistrate but the relief has been sought against the order or action or inaction of police officer who is dealing with grant of permission for use of loud speaker. In my opinion petitioner can approach the appellate court by filing a revision against the order of SDM passed under Section 133 Cr.P.C. but not against any order or action of police authority. This revision petition, in a manner in which it has been filed, is not maintainable. This Court cannot entertain the petition by which action or order of ACP, Delhi Police in respect to use of sound system in public place is challenged. Hence, this revision petition is dismissed.
Announced in the Open Court on 8th Day of May 2014 (Anil Kumar) ASJ05/ Dwarka Courts Delhi/08.05.2014 Page no. 5/5 08.05.2014