IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3858 of 2009 RAJBALI SAH S/O RAMESHWAR SAH Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. AMBIKA CHAURASIA S/O LATE MUKURDHUN CHAURASIA ----------- 2. 03.08.2010 The petitioner is aggrieved by the dismissal of his complaint filed under Section 133 Cr.P.C. as also the revisional order by which the revisional court has not interfered with the impugned order. The petitioner had complained that the opposite parties had been running a mill in their house, which was causing pollution and disturbances in the area. When the proceeding was initiated witnesses were examined and thereafter the S.D.M., Bagaha directed the opposite parties to put silencer and take other prohibitory measures to control pollution within a period of three months. As against this the petitioner moved the revisional court but is unable to give any information as to whether after the order of the S.D.M. Bagaha dated 24.5.2005, the opposite parties had taken any steps in regard to regulation of the mill. Since Section 133 Cr.P.C. enjoins the Magistrate to even regulate such nuisance and the petitioner is unable to satisfy this court that the same has not been done by the opposite parties. I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. This application is dismissed. Fahad. (Anjana Prakash, J)