Village committee has blocked the public road

Village committee has blocked the public road. I am from a village in Odisha, India, I have two separate plots which are in my name and they are adjacent to each other and their boundaries joined. In front of both the plots there is government land and in front of that land there is the […]

Village committee has blocked the public road. I am from a village in Odisha, India, I have two separate plots which are in my name and they are adjacent to each other and their boundaries joined. In front of both the plots there is government land and in front of that land there is the main road. I have built my home in the first plot and have not done anything in the second plot. My village committee is allowing me only a single passage from my home to the main road but they are blocking the passage to the main road from my second plot. And they are threatening me to boycott from the village if I demand a road for my second plot. Is it legal from my village committee or by government rules?

Asked from: Odisha

You have the right to access the public road without fear and obstruction.  The village committee lacks the authority to obstruct the public road. The act of blocking the public road and issuing threats against those seeking access to it constitutes an offence. 

It is imperative that you promptly file a complaint against the individual who has illegally obstructed the road. In the Hari Ram vs. Jyoti Prasad and Anr. (2011) 2 SCC 682 the hon'ble Supreme Court has held that: 

Any act of encroachment is a wrong committed by the doer. Such an encroachment when made to a public property like encroachment to public road would be a graver wrong, as such wrong prejudicially affects a number of people and therefore is a public wrong.

Whoever voluntarily obstructs any person so as to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed is said to wrongfully restrain that person. It is punishable under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

You should also move an application to the local Sub-Divisional Magistrate for taking action against the miscreants under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (crpc). Now Section 164 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023. For more legal help please visit Kanoon India.

Read also:

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.