Smt. Tanushree Sinha, @ Tanu Shri Sinha v. The State of Jharkhand

1. Smt. Tanushree Sinha, @ Tanu Shri Sinha, wife of Sri Shambhu Nath Sinha, aged about 59 years 2. Shambhu Nath Sinha, son of late Shankar Shekhar Sinha, aged about 68 Both residents of Bibhuti Apartment, Flat No.G/E, Luby Circular Road, Dhanbad, P.O., P.S. and District-Dhanbad -- Versus -- ….. Petitioner

The State of Jharkhand 2. Sunil Kumar Singh, father’s name not known, Secretary Flat Owners Association, Bibhuti Apartment, Luby Circular Road, Dhanbad, residing at Bibhuti Apartment, Flat No.2/G, P.O., P.S. and District-Dhanbad CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI --- ---- …... Opposite Parties For the Petitioners :- Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate For the State :- Mr. A.K. Tiwari, Advocate ---- 5/22.08.2022 This petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated

18.07.2019 passed by the learned S.D.M., Dhanbad, in Misc. Case No.28/2015 whereby the petition filed under section 133 Cr.P.C. (b) and (c) has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for quashing of the order dated 08.11.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Criminal Revision No.258 of 2019 whereby the criminal revision filed by the petitioners has been rejected. Mr. Suraj Singh, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petition was filed before the S.D.M., Dhanbad under section 133 Cr.P.C for shifting the generator in question which was installed in the Apartment. He submits that the learned S.D.M., Dhanbad has dismissed the petition which was challenged before the learned Sessions Judge and the learned Sessions Judge, Dhanbad has affirmed the order vide order dated 08.11.2019. He submits that both the orders are not as per the parameters of Section 133 Cr.P.C and that is why the petitioners have challenged those orders before this Court. The Court has perused the impugned orders. The learned 2 Sessions Judge, Dhanbad has recorded that the petitioner himself has been the Treasurer of the Flat Association. The generator even has been replaced with a sound and smokeless one after the direction of ‘Nibha Dutta’s case. He also taken note that there is no other specific place where the generator can be shifted to and the new installed generator which has already been approved by the Pollution Department. The petitioners have not been able to demonstrate before the court concerned about his ailment and considering all these aspects, both the courts have rejected the petition filed under section 133 Cr.P.C. There is no illegality in the impugned orders. No relief can be extended to the petitioners. Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No.3970 of 2019 is dismissed. I.A. No.4851 of 2022 has been filed for fixing an early date of hearing. As this petition has already been decided by this Court, I.A.No.4851 of 2022 has become infructuous and disposed of as infructuous. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) SI/