Madras High Court
A.Siddique Basha vs /
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
W.P.No.30792 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on :30.11.2023 Pronounced on:05.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
W.P.No.30792 of 2023
and
W.M.P.Nos.30468, 30469 of 2023
A.Siddique Basha .. Petitioner
/versus/
1.The Sub Divisional Magistrate/Sub Collector,
O/o Sub Collector,
Chengalpet District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
E-2, Thirukazhukundram Police Station,
Chengalpet District. .. Respondents
Writ Petition has been filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of
India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of summon
vide Na.Ka.No.728/2021/A1, dated 29.09.2023 on the file of the 1st
respondent and to quash the same.
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.30792 of 2023
For Petitioner :Mr.M.Dhivakar
For Respondents :Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
-----
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed to quash the notice issued under Section 110 of Cr.P.C., to the petitioner, in view of the criminal complaint filed against him in Cr.No.692 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 341, 324, 506(2), 307 of IPC r/w Section 3(1)of the Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss)Act, 1992 on the file of the Thirukazhukundram Police Station.
2.According to the petitioner, the case registered in Crime No.692 of 2022 was investigation by the 2nd respondent police and final report has been filed which was taken on file in P.R.C.No.29 of 2023. This petitioner is arrayed as 8th accused and the charge against him is for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 341, 506(2), 307, 326, 294(b), 120(B), 323 of IPC and 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.30792 of 2023 Section 3(1) of the Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss)Act, 1992. 11 months after the occurrence, the impugned notice issued under Section 110 of Cr.P.C., for enquiry is not maintainable and further the petitioner is not an habitual offender to invoke Section 110 of Cr.P.C.
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) admits that the petitioner is not an habitual offender and Crime No.692 of 2022 is the only criminal case against him.
4. Section 110 of Cr.P.C., reads as below:-
Section 110: Security for good behaviour from habitual offenders. When[ an Executive Magistrate]receives information that there is within his local jurisdiction a person who-
(a) is by habit a robber, house- breaker, thief, or forger, or,
(b) is by habit a receiver of stolen property knowing the same to have been stolen, or
(c) habitually protects or harbours thieves, or aids in the concealment or disposal of stolen property, or 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.30792 of 2023
(d) habitually commits, or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of, the offence of kidnapping, abduction, extortion, cheating or mischief, or any offence punishable under Chapter XII of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), or under section 489A, section 489B, section 489C or section 489D of that Code, or
(e) habitually commits, or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of, offences, involving a breach of the peace, or
(f) habitually commits, or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of-
(i) any offence under one or more of the following. Acts, namely:-
(a) the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940 );
(b) the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 ] (46 of 1973 );
(c) the Employees’ Provident Funds [and Family Pension Fund] Act, 1952 (19 of 1952).
(d) the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954 );
(e) the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955 );
(f) the Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 (22 of 1955 );
(g) the Customs Act, 1962 or (52 of 1962 );
(ii)any offence punishable under any other law providing for the prevention of hoarding or profiteering or of adulteration of food or drugs or of corruption, or
(g)is so desperate and dangerous as to render his being 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.30792 of 2023 at large without security hazardous to the community, such Magistrate may, in the manner hereinafter provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond, with sureties, for his good behaviour for such period, not exceeding three years, as the Magistrate thinks fit.”
5. The petitioner does not fall under the category of habitual offender. However, in this case, there are 12 more accused. Whether they are habitual offender or not is not placed before this Court.
6. In the light of the above fact, impugned summons under Section 110 of Cr.P.C., to the petitioner alone is quashed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellanoeus Petitions are closed.
05.12.2023 Index:yes/no Netural Citation:yes/no ari 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.30792 of 2023 To:
1.The Sub Divisional Magistrate/Sub Collector, O/o Sub Collector, Chengalpet District.
2.The Inspector of Police, E-2, Thirukazhukundram Police Station, Chengalpet District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.30792 of 2023 DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.
ari delivery order made in W.P.No.30792 of 2023 and W.M.P.Nos.30468, 30469 of 2023 05.12.2023 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis