IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 82 OF 2009 SMT. ANNUCESSAO MORAES E. D'CUNHA ... Petitioner Versus STATE THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR AND 7 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Shivan Dessai, Advocate for the Petitioner. Coram:- R. M. SAVANT, J. Date:- 23rd February, 2010 P.C. This Petition takes exception to the judgment and order dated 18.12.2008 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Goa, Margao, by which the judgment and order dated 28.02.2008 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, Quepem, came to be confirmed. 2. The subject matter of the two orders are the proceedings under Section 133 of Criminal Procedure Code. The Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 herein are the villagers of the said Village Quepem who filed a complaint vide their application dated 23.6.2003 that an existing traditional rain water passage was blocked by the present Petitioner by stacking laterite stones causing the rain water to flood around their houses and further it was posing imminent danger to their life and property. The Executive Magistrate on receipt of the complaint had forwarded it to the Police Inspector, Quepem Police Station, for verification and report. A report was accordingly submitted by the Quepem Police Station and thereupon a conditional order came to be passed by the Executive Magistrate under Section 133 of Cr. P.C. Thereafter, the learned Executive Magistrate had conducted an inquiry and passed the final order dated 28.02.2008 directing the Petitioner to open the said obstruction of the laterite stones stacked on the outlets of the canal upto a height of one metre within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the said order, failing which he would be liable under Section 188 of I.P.C. 3. However, it is necessary to be stated that prior to the said order, the earlier order dated 15.3.2004 passed by the Executive Magistrate came to be set aside by the Sessions Court in Revision and the matter came to be remanded back to the Executive Magistrate for a de novo decision. It is upon the said de novo consideration of the matter that the impugned order dated 28.02.2008 came to be passed. 4. Aggrieved by the said order dated 28.02.2008 the Petitioner filed a Revision Application in the District and Sessions Court, South Goa, Margao, which Revision Application was heard by the Principal District and Sessions Judge and by order dated 18.12.2008, the said Revision Application came to be rejected. Both the Courts below have considered the material on record and have come to a conclusion that the Petitioner has blocked the existing traditional rain water passage by staking laterite stones which has resulted in flooding in their houses and collapse of the wall of one of such houses leading to a report being submitted by the State to the Court. As mentioned hereinabove the aforesaid two orders dated 28.02.2008 and 18.12.2008 are the subject matter of the above Petition. 5. On behalf of the Petitioner, it is sought to be contended that Section 133(a) could not be invoked as there is no material on record to indicate that the property in question was a public property or passage was a public passage. As indicated above, the learned Executive Magistrate on a report submitted by the Police and upon inquiry had reached a conclusion that the Petitioner has blocked the existing traditional rain water passage by stacking laterite stones which finding has been confirmed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, by the order dated 18.12.2008. The requisites for the application of clause (a) of Section 133 were therefore satisfied. In any event, the point sought to be canvassed by the Petitioner would entail reappreciation of the material on record which in my view is impermissible in the Writ jurisdiction of this Court. Having perused the impugned orders, I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned orders for this Court to interfere. In that view of the matter, there is no merit in the Petition which is accordingly dismissed. R. M. SAVANT, J. at*