The Himachal Pradesh High Court has upheld an order directing the removal of an obstruction from a village pathway in Kinnaur district, ruling that authorities acted within their powers to prevent a possible breach of peace and protect a route that had allegedly been used by villagers for decades.
Justice Sandeep Sharma dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by two landowners who challenged an order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Kalpa, requiring them to clear the disputed passage.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose after a complaint was made alleging that a pathway situated on land recorded as Khasra No. 720 in village Basteri had been blocked. The complainant claimed that local residents had been using the route for nearly 70 to 80 years to reach their homes, fields, and even the village cremation ground.
Following a police inquiry, a report was submitted to the SDM under Section 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Revenue officials, including the Tehsildar, reported that the pathway had been obstructed and noted that local customary law did not permit a person to stop access to routes leading to agricultural fields.
Based on the material before him, the SDM ordered the removal of the obstruction in June 2023. The landowners subsequently approached the High Court challenging that decision.
The petitioners argued that the land was privately owned and that the SDM had exceeded his jurisdiction. They contended that questions relating to ownership and title could only be decided by a civil court and not by an executive magistrate.
They also claimed that they were not given a proper opportunity to present their case before the order was passed and relied on an earlier civil court injunction relating to the same land.
The High Court found that notices had been issued and statements of both sides had been recorded before the SDM passed the order. The Court rejected the contention that the petitioners were denied a hearing.
Justice Sharma observed that the SDM had not decided ownership rights but had acted to address a dispute concerning the use of a pathway and the likelihood of public unrest.
“The Sub-Divisional Magistrate nowhere decided the question of title,” the Court noted, while emphasizing that the authority was empowered to pass preventive orders where a dispute regarding the use of land could lead to a breach of peace.
The Court also relied on the Tehsildar's report and statements from local residents indicating that the route had been used for many years by villagers.
Finding no legal infirmity in the SDM's action, the High Court dismissed the revision petition and upheld the order directing removal of the obstruction from the pathway.
The Court held that until a competent civil court declares otherwise, the villagers' use of the path could not be obstructed and the SDM's order would continue to operate.
The revision petition and all pending applications were accordingly dismissed.
Case Details
Case Title: Pramod Kumar and Another v. Hir Chand and Another
Case Number: Criminal Revision No. 465 of 2024
Judge: Justice Sandeep Sharma
Decision Date: May 5, 2026
