Bose @ Kubendiran vs The Sub Divisional Magistrate on 7 February, 2022

[Cites 33, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Bose @ Kubendiran vs The Sub Divisional Magistrate on 7 February, 2022

Bench: G.Ilangovan

                                                              Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch


                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                            Reserved on : 27.03.2023
                                            Delivered On: 25.07.2023

                                                   CORAM:


                                  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN

                       Crl.O.P.(MD).Nos.3929, 6030, 8165, 8797, 8805, 8932, 8934, 8939,
                     9407, 12108, 12112, 12927, 12939, 13194, 14355, 14889, 15628, 15825,
                        15843, 16234, 16705, 17228, 17362, 17473, 18585, 18639, 18781,
                         20024, 20070, 20373, 20623, 21820, 22353 and 22569 of 2022,
                     699, 2441, 2510, 2601, 2736, 3255, 3462, 3734, 3920, 3937, 4042, 4374,
                       4619, 4652, 4823, 4847, 4855, 4838, 4994, 5000, 5151, 5350, 5780,
                       5860, 6065, 6184, 6271, 6349, 6572, 6679, 6681, 6730, 6772, 7283,
                       7666, 7937, 7989, 8016, 8097, 8101, 8169, 8250, 8316, 8322, 8338,
                        9600, 9736, 9872, 10182, 10482, 10485, 10492 and 10551 of 2023

                                        and W.P.(MD).No.10000 of 2023

                     and Crl.M.P.(MD).Nos. 2867, 4205, 5509, 5913, 5923, 5986, 5996,
                        5997, 6102, 7651, 7653, 7654, 7656, 8204, 8212, 8213, 9264, 9265,
                     9686, 10283, 10459, 10461, 10484, 10485, 10769, 11157, 11647, 11648,
                         11741, 11827, 12484, 12488, 12575, 12631, 13843, 13863, 14114,
                                 14347, 15356, 15796, 15797 and 15946 of 2022,
                      644, 645, 2194, 2248, 2250, 2348, 2349, 2464, 2465, 2977, 2978, 3123,
                        3126, 3512, 3514, 3532, 3533, 3618, 3864, 3865, 4037, 4039, 4088,
                        4238, 4239, 4275, 4276, 4289, 4290, 4368, 4370, 4423, 4428, 4536,
                        4726, 4727, 5033, 5300, 5404, 5475, 5476, 5547, 5739, 5740, 5804,
                        5806, 5855, 5857, 5884, 5886, 6355, 6945, 6947, 6997, 7022, 7067,
                        7203, 7204, 7239, 7241, 7258, 7712, 7812, 7813, 7874, 7875, 8082,
                                       8318, 8320, 8323 and 8382 of 2023

                                   and W.M.P.(MD).Nos.8772 and 8773 of 2023



                     1/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                       Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch


                     Cause Title in Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022

                     Bose @ Kubendiran                                                  ... Petitioner

                                                             Vs.

                     1.The Sub Divisional Magistrate,
                       cum The Revenue Divisional Officer,
                       Pattukottai Sub Division,
                       Thanjavur District.

                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       Madukkur Police Station,
                       Thanjavur District.                         ... Respondents/Complainants

                     PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the

                     Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records and quash the

                     proceedings in M.C.No.                /2022/A3, dated 07.02.2022, on the file

                     of the Sub Divisional Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer,

                     Pattukottai Sub Division, Thanjavur District/the 1st respondent.

                                         For Petitioner       : Mr.T.Kumar

                                         For Respondents      : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar
                                                                Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

                                                     COMMON ORDER

In all these matters the common question of law arises, apart from individual circumstantial facts. We will discuss the common question of law. Thereafter, we will take up the individual cases on factual 2/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch circumstances.

2.Right to know the accusation emanates not from any law. It is not a gift by any law or of law. It inherently exists in every human being. It can be even said that human right emanates only from right to know. If the accused does not know the substance of the accusation, he need not answer the same. It cannot be construed as accusation at all. When the accusation is of criminal nature as said in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it must be strictly adhered to. The right of the accused has travelled a much longer distance. The present society lives more on information than on any other factors. We will confirm whether this observation of this Court has been recognized judicially.

3.All these cases have been challenging the proceedings undertaken by the respondents/Executive Magistrates under Section 110 Cr.P.C.

4.Section 110 Cr.P.C. falls under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 106 Cr.P.C. speaks about the security for 3/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch keeping the peace on conviction. Section 107 Cr.P.C. speaks about the security for keeping the peace in other cases. Section 108 Cr.P.C. speaks about the security for good behaviour from persons disseminating seditious matters. Section 109 Cr.P.C. speaks about the security for good behaviour from suspected persons. Section 110 Cr.P.C. speaks about the security for good behaviour from habitual offenders.

5.We are here to deal with Section 110 Cr.P.C. which speaks about the case, in which the above said security can be ordered. Section 111 Cr.P.C. deals about the procedure to be adopted while acting under Sections 107, 108, 109 and 110 Cr.P.C. Section 110 Cr.P.C. reads as under.

“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 of disposal of stolen property, 4/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch or

(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);

(d) the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954);

(e) the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955);

5/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

(f) the Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 (22 of 1955);

(g) the Customs Act, 1962 (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 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. Amendmend Act, 2005:- In order to effectively deal with offences under the Foreigners Act, 1946 a need has been felt to strengthen the hands of States authorities by empowering them to take action under Section 110 of the Code against persons assisting infiltration. This will help to check the flow of undesirable foreigners into the Country. The Foreigners Act, 1946 is, accordingly, being added as item (h) of Sub-clause (I) of Clause (f).” 6/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

6.Procedure set out in Section 111 Cr.P.C. as under:

“111. Order to be made:- When a Magistrate acting under section 107, section 108, section 109 or section 110, deems it necessary to require any person to show cause under such section he shall make an order in writing, setting forth the substance of the information received, the amount of the bond to be executed, the term for which it is to be in force, and the number, character and class of sureties (if any) required.”

7.Reading of the above said two provisions make the position clear to the effect that specific information must be received by the Executive Magistrate to take action under Section 110 Cr.P.C. So, for initiating the above said action, show cause notice must be issued. The substance of the information must be set out in the notice namely, 1) The amount of the bond to be executed 2) Duration of the time and 3) The number and character and class of the sureties. So thereupon he must make an order. Opportunity must be given to the respondent. Subjective satisfaction must be recorded by the Executive Magistrate and that order also must be accompanied by the summons or the warrant as the case may be. 7/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

8.Section 116 Cr.P.C. speaks about the procedure to be followed. Again he must record the subjective satisfaction with regard to the information received. After that the final order must be passed under Section 117 Cr.P.C. We will stop here, since these Sections are not relevant for our discussion now.

9.While dealing similar matters, in a batch of cases in Syed Ibrahim and others Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Police Law and Order cum Executive Magistrate, Madurai City, dated 23.12.2021, this Court relied and extracted the history of the provisions. Let me produce the above said paragraph.

“4.... Way back in 1980, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in AIR 1981 SC 674 (Gopalanachari Vs. State of Kerala), has observed the ill-effect of Section 110 Cr.P.C. Paragraph No.5 of the said judgment is extracted hereunder:-

“A closer look at Section 110 of the Code in the setting of peril to personal liberty thus becomes a necessity in this case. Counsel for the State, Shri Francis, amicus curiae Shri Abdul Kader and Senior Advocate Shri Tarkunde, agreed that unless the preventive power under Section 110 were prevented from pervasive misuse by zealous judicial vigilance and interpretative strictness, many a poor man, maybe cast into prison by sticking the label of 'habitual' or by using such frightening expressions as 'desperate', 'dangerous' and 'hazardous to the community'. Law is what the law does, even as freedom is what freedom does. Going by that test, Section 110 cannot be permitted in our free Republic to pick up the homeless and the have- nots as it did when under British subjection because to-day to be poor is not a crime in this country. George Bernard Shaw, though ignorant of 110, did sardonically comment that "the greatest of evils and the worst of crimes is poverty". 8/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

10.After that the following concluding remark was made by the Honourable Supreme Court.

“Let us allay misunderstandings. We are clear in our mind that prevention is better than cure, in criminal law as in medicines, especially when there is judicial supervision. Society cannot be left at the mercy of predators and bandits who, like wild beasts, prey upon the weak and the innocent and become a menace to peace and security of society. But liberty is a prized value and that is why we have insisted not merely upon the Police having to be careful before marching poor people into court under Section 110 but the Court itself having to be gravely concerned about using preventive provisions against helpless persons, not on formal testimony readily produced to order as we have noticed in a recent case, [Prem Chand Vs. Union of India, Writ Petition No.3050 of 1980 decided on 11.11.1980, MANU/SC/0191/1980:1981 CriL J5 (SC)] but on convincing testimony of clear and present danger to society.”

11.So the Honourable Supreme Court was of the considered view that Article 21 of the Constitution of India must be kept in mind while dealing with the above said matters.

12.With this background let us go to the other aspects, as to whether the summon that was used to be issued by the Executive Magistrate must enforce separate order. The above said issue was referred to the Full Bench of Bombay High Court in the case of Farhan Nasir Khan Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others reported in 2020 (206 9/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch (AIC).

13.After going through the entire law on that point, it was decided that a separate order must be passed by the Magistrate. That order must be enclosed along with show cause notice. Apart from that, the substance of the information received must also be set out. So what is essential according to the Honourable Full Bench of Bombay High Court is that subjective satisfaction of the Executive Magistrate must be recorded soon after receiving the information from the source for the purpose of initiating action. Not only the order but also the notice must have the character of information furnished by the respondent about the information received.

14.Before that the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Madhu Limaye Vs. S.D.M.Monghyr, reported in AIR 1971 SC 2486, has observed as under:

“We have seen the provisions of Section 107. That section says that action is to be taken in the manner here-in-after provided and this clearly indicates that it is not open to a Magistrate in such a case to depart from the procedure to any substantial extent. This is very salutary because the liberty of the person is involved and the law is rightly solicitous that this liberty should only be curtailed according to its own procedure and not according to the whim of the Magistrate concerned. It behoves us, therefore, to emphasise the safeguards built into the procedure because from there will arise 10/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch the consideration of the reasonableness of the restrictions in the interest of public order or in the interest of the ,general public. In this very case the Apex Court went on to observe in Para 37 as under:-

Since the person to be proceeded against has to show cause, it is but natural that he must know the grounds for apprehending a breach of the peace or disturbance of the public tranquillity at his hands. Although the section speaks of the 'substance of the information' it does not mean the order should not be full. It may not repeat the information bodily but it must give proper notice of what has moved the Magistrate to take the action. This order is the foundation of the jurisdiction and the word 'substance' means the essence of the most important parts of the information.”

15.This Judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court will highlight the importance of due process. Much prior to the above said three judgments, a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in the case of Suleman Adam Vs. Emperor reported in MANU/MH/0054/1909 has held that the notice must accompany a copy of the order made by the Executive Magistrate.

16.With regard to the nature of proceedings, it was held by the Full Bench of Kerala High Court in the case of Thekkittil Gopalankutti Nair Vs. Melepurath Sankunni Ezhuthaseah reported in AIR 1971 Ker 280 (FB).

17.With regard to the satisfaction of the Executive Magistrate, it was observed that breach of peace requires a subjective satisfaction, while good behaviour requires objective satisfaction. It was also further 11/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch held that except clause (g), Section 110 Cr.P.C. can be invoked only in cases where previous case is pending against the petitioner. Now it is more or less well settled that the show cause notice issued must accompany a separate order, which would consists of the substance of the information received from the source and even if any one of these or both of these are not available, then the proceedings will get vitiated.

18.With these background now let us go to the individual cases. Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022:

The first respondent on the basis of the information furnished by the second respondent issued the notice to the petitioner calling upon him as to why proceedings under Section 110 Cr.P.C. should not be initiated against him. He was asked to appear before the first respondent on 08.02.2022 at about 03.00 p.m. Along with it enclosure has been annexed, wherein, it has been stated that he is facing several cases in and around Mudukur Police Station Limit. He is also a history sheeted person in H.S.No.215/2005. He is also in touch with similarly placed accused persons. Because of his attitude and behaviour, public peace is also 12/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch affected. He was also questioned as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for Rs.5,000/- for keeping peace for one year.

(ii) So the question arises for consideration is whether this will satisfy the requirement of law, it is absolutely not in the light of the above said discussion. Not even a single case in this petition is mentioned that it is involved the substance of information and the subjective satisfaction of the first respondent to initiate proceedings. On that score the above said summon is liable to be quashed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6030 of 2022:

The summon was issued to show cause why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour for a period of one year for Rs.50,000/-. In pursuance to the above said summon, he also appeared before the first respondent and executed bond for Rs. 50,000/- to keep good behaviour for one year. Challenging the above said order, which is dated 17.12.2021, this petition has been filed on the 13/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch ground that no proper procedure was followed by the first respondent either for making the enquiry or while passing the above said order.

(ii) The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) would submit that since the petitioner already appeared before the first respondent and executed a bond, the matter has become infructuous.

(iii) But it is seen that no reasoned order has been passed by the first respondent by following the proper procedure. The details of the enquiry which was undertaken is also not produced before this Court. On the sole ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8165 of 2022:

Challenging the summon that was issued by the first respondent under Section 110 Cr.P.C., this petition has been filed. Notice reads that this petitioner is involved in Crime No.156 of 2022 under Section 294(b), 341, 323, 506(ii) of IPC, 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(m), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)Act, 2015. To prevent the petitioner 14/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch from indulging in criminal activities in future, information was furnished by the second respondent to initiate action under Section 110 Cr.P.C. So summon was issued to him, calling upon him as to why he should not be directed to execute bond for keeping good behaviour. The enquiry was stated to be held on 26.04.2022. The amount and the bond period is also mentioned. But nothing has been stated with regard to the substance of information and subjective satisfaction of the first respondent to initiate action.

(ii) It is the case of the petitioner that he is not a habitual offender.

He is involved only in the above said crime number, that too which arises out of a civil issue. So according to him, he is not a habitual offender. So initiation of proceedings under Section 110 Cr.P.C. itself is not fair under law.

(iii) Now as mentioned above it is not to the satisfaction of the requirement of law. On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

15/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8797 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent in M.C.No. 158 of 2022, dated 26.04.2022, this petition has been filed. Reading of the summon / notice shows that information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Nainar Kovil Police Station, that this petitioner is indulged in criminal activities causing breach of peace in the locality.

On that basis, he was called upon to appear for enquiry and except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

(ii) Now as mentioned above it is not satisfied the requirement of law. On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8805 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent in M.C.No.

19 of 2022, dated 30.03.2022, this petition has been filed. Reading of the summon / notice shows that this petitioner is involved in Crime No. 206 of 2018 u/s 294(b), 323, 353, 506 of IPC on the murder of one Arun 16/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Further it shows that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Lalapettai Police Station, to initiate action against this petitioner under Section 110 Cr.P.C. stating that the petitioner may indulge in creating law and order problem and breaching of peace in the locality. He was called upon to offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute bond for one year for Rs.1,00,000/-. Except the above said information, no other materials are available along with the summon.

(ii) As mentioned above it is not satisfied the requirement of law. On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8932 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent in M.C.No. 156 of 2022, dated 26.04.2022, this petition has been filed. Reading of the summon / notice shows that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Nainar Kovil Police Station, that this petitioner is 17/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch indulged in criminal activities causing breach of peace in the locality.

On that basis, he was called upon to appear for enquiry and except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8934 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 05.10.2021 in M.C.No.173 of 2021, this petition has been filed. The summons reads that the Inspector of Police, Nainar Kovil Police Station, sent an information stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that basis, he was called upon to appear for enquiry and except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

(ii) Now as mentioned above it is not satisfied the requirement of 18/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch law. On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8939 of 2022:

The summon reads that the Inspector of Police, Kadaladi has sent an information stating that the petitioner may indulge in activities, creating law and order problem and breach of peace. So he was called upon to explain as to why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- and keep good behaviour for one year at a specified date for enquiry. Except the above said contents, no other materials have been enclosed to satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) Now as mentioned above it is not satisfied the requirement of law. On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

19/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.9407 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.04.2022 in M.C.No.148 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summons reads that the Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, sent an information stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that basis, he was called upon to appear for enquiry and except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12108 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 17.06.2022 in M.C.No.207 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summons reads that the Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, sent an information stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal 20/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch activities causing breach of peace. On that basis, he was called upon to appear for enquiry and except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12112 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent against the petitioner, dated 17.06.2022 in M.C.No.206 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summons reads that the Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, sent an information stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that basis, he was called upon to appear for enquiry and except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

(ii) Now as mentioned above it is not satisfied the requirement of 21/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch law. On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12927 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 28.06.2022 in M.C.No.218 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summons reads that the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Town Police Station, sent an information stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that basis, he was called upon to appear for enquiry and except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

22/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.12939 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, in M.C.No.47 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summons reads that the Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, sent an information stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that basis, he was directed to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- for keeping good behaviour for a period of one year. Except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

(ii) Now as mentioned above it is not satisfied the requirement of law. On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.13194 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 17.06.2022 in LIR.No.31 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the petitioner was involved in several criminal cases.

To prevent the petitioner from indulging in criminal activities in future, 23/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch he was directed to appear before the first respondent and explain as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for Rs.25,000/- along with two sureties for one year. So along with the above said summon, the information was also received from the Inspector of Police, wherein it has been stated that the petitioner is involved in several criminal cases namely Crime Nos.69/2022, 215/2022, 175/2022, 32/2022, 573/2016 and 69/2018. So the above said proceedings was sought to be initiated. Except that no other information or order has been enclosed.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.14355 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.07.2022 in M.C.No.226 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Emeneshwaram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may 24/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.14889 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 09.08.2022 in E.M.C.No.208 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the petitioner was found standing near Melapalayam Market area without sufficient reason. On enquiry by police team, he did not disclose the reason for standing in that place. Suspecting that he may indulge in criminal activities, the above said summon has been issued.

(ii) This Court is completely lost to understand as to how the proceedings are initiated against the petitioner. Absolutely, there is no 25/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch reason for the second respondent to make a recommendation. Standing in a public place without any reason or cause will not constitute an offence. It is the right to any one to move freely, under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India, which has been what exactly stated by the Honourable Supreme Court of India in the first Judgment cited above. It is a clear case of abuse of process of law. On that ground the entire proceedings are liable to be quashed. It is made clear that no liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate any action against the petitioner without any substance.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.15628 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 04.08.2022 in A1.M.C.No.48 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Thiruppalakkudi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been 26/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.15825 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 05.08.2022 in M.C.No.38 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Taluk Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, 27/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.15843 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 05.08.2022 in M.C.No.269 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Taluk Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

28/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16234 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 02.08.7.2022 in M.C.No.310 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Abiramam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.16705 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 09.09.2022 in M.C.No.3359/2022/A1, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector 29/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch of Police, Thirumangalam Town Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.17228 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 18.08.2022 in M.C.No.304 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police (L&O), Emeneshwaram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace.

On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a 30/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.17362 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent against the petitioner, dated 02.02.2022 in M.C.No.41 of 2021, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Taluk Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

31/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.17473 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 20.05.2022 in M.C.No.193 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Taluk Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

32/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.18585 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 02.10.2022 in EMC (E) No.280 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Melapalayam Police Station, stating that the petitioner was found in VSD Palli Vasal area without sufficient reason. Apprehending that he may cause trouble to the public peace, he was brought under enquiry. He was already involved in Crime Nos.887/2020, 35/2021 & 344/2022. On that ground the above said proceedings were initiated. He was required to appear before the authority at a specified date and time and also offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- for keeping good behaviour for one year. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

33/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No18639 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 07.09.2022 in M.C.No.2787/22/M.C, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.18781 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 07.09.2022 in M.C.No.2789/2022/MC, this petition has been filed. The 34/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Melur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20024 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 19.10.2022 in Na.Ka.A7/5029/2022-22, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kalayarkovil Police Station, stating that the petitioner is a history sheeted person in H.S.No.310 of 2021. Apart from that he has also involved in Crime No.581 of 2021 for the offence under Sections 35/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch 143, 341, 283 of IPC. The petitioner continuously indulged in breaking the peace and causing threat to the public. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the authority on 21.10.2022 at about 04.00 p.m. to show cause as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20070 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 01.04.2022 in M.C.No.113 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Nainar Kovil Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and 36/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch time. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20373 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 10.10.2022 in A2/M.C/155/2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities and also may cause disturbances to public peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, 37/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.20623 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 24.08.2022 in A2.M.C.No.132 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, stating that the petitioner is involved in committing breach of peace in public area and causing nuisance from reliable sources. He was directed to appear at a specified date and time and show cause as to why he should not be directed to executed a bond for Rs.50,000/- for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

38/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.21820 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 28.11.2022 in EMC (E) No.361/2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai Police Station, stating that the petitioner was found standing near Palayamkottai, KTC Nagar, Mangamal Road, without sufficient reason on 24.11.2022 at about 04.30 p.m. On enquiry it was found that he involved in Crime Nos.401/2018, 565/2015, 655/2016. He is also a History sheeted person in H.S.No. 458/2022. Therefore, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- for keeping good behaviour along with two sureties. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

39/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.22353 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 08.11.2022 in LIT No.124/2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Palayamkottai Police Station, stating that on 08.11.2022 at about 11.00 a.m., the petitioner was found there around Palayamkottai Market area without any sufficient reason. On enquiry it was found that he is involved in Crime Nos.350/2015, 803/2009, 158/2009, 176/2009.

He was also a history sheeted person in H.S.No.247/2005. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

40/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.22569 of 2022:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 09.12.2022 in M.C.No.183 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.699 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 29.12.2022 in M.C.No.5332/2022/A1, this petition has been filed. The 41/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kallikudi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2441 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.04.2022 in M.C.No.148 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and 42/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch time. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2510 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 23.06.2022 in M.C.No.221 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Kovilankulam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, 43/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2601 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 19.01.2023 in M.C.No.A3/397/2022, 12699/2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Mandapam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

44/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.2736 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 10.01.2023 in EMC (W) No.10/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Thatchanallur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. He was found standing near Thatchanallur Bazar on 09.01.2023 at about 08.00 p.m. without any sufficient reason. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour for Rs.

50,000/-. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3255 of 2023:

45/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 01.04.2022 in M.C.No.111 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Nainarkovil Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3462 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 14.02.2023 in A3/M.C.No.28 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kaliyakkavilai Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he 46/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3734 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 02.02.2023 in M.C.No.08 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Mudhukulathur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, 47/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3920 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 19.01.2023 in M.C.No.03 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent for enquiry at a specified date and time. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

48/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3937 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 19.01.2023 in M.C.No.05 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4042 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 23.02.2023 in M.C.No.01 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Pudhukadai Police Station, stating that the petitioner may 49/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4374 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 21.02.2023 in M.C.No.06 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Parthibanur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law. 50/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4619 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 08.02.2023 in M.C.No.24 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Ilanchembur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

51/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4652 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 01.03.2023 in M.C.No.347 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Nainarkovil Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4823 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 08.02.2023 in M.C.No.23 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub 52/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Inspector of Police, Ilanchembur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4847 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 06.02.2023 in M.C.No.19 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Ilanchembur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no 53/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4855 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 06.02.2023 in M.C.No.15 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Ilanchembur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

54/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4838 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 06.02.2023 in M.C.No.18 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Ilanchembur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

55/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.4994 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 10.03.2023 in M.C.No.403 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Rajapalayam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5000 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 56/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch 23.02.2023 in M.C.No.25 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Paramakudi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5151 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 06.03.2023 in M.C.No.A3/46/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation 57/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5350 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 23.12.2022 in M.C.No.358 of 2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Rajapalayam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

58/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5780 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 02.02.2023 in M.C.No.A3/394/2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Devipattinam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

59/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.5860 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.05.2022 in M.C.No.A3/253/202 5773/2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Bazar Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6065 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 24.02.2023 in A2/M.C.No.56 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The 60/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Valliyoor Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6184 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 13.03.2023 in C2/MC356/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kanniyakumari Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation 61/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6271 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 23.03.2023 in A3/898/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Munnirpallam Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, 62/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6349 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 23.02.2023 in A2/M.C.120/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Colechel Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

63/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6572 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 01.03.2023 in M.C.No.106/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar West Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6679 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 21.02.2023 in M.C.No.43/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector 64/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch of Police, Peraiyur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6681 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 27.03.2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Pandhalkudi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been 65/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6730 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 28.02.2023 in M.C.No.163/2022 this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Kadaladi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, 66/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.6772 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 13.03.2023 in C2/MC349/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kanniyakumari Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

67/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.7283 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 01.07.2022 in M.C.No.2447/2022/A1, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kallikudi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.7666 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 27.03.2023 in M.C.No.36 of 2023 this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector 68/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch of Police, Emaneshwaram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.7937 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 28.02.2023 in Cr.M.P.No.11 of 2023 this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Keelaselvanoor Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the 69/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.7989 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 24.01.2023 in LIR/30/SI/Dhalavaipuram/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Dhalavaipuram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8016 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the second respondent, dated 01.03.2023 in M.C.No.323/2022, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Nainarkovil Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the second respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8097 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 30.03.2023 in LIR/24/SI,Dhalavaipuram/2023, this petition has been 71/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Dhalavaipuram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8169 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 19.04.2023 in M.C.No.23/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and 72/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8101 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 19.04.2023 in M.C.No.22/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Thondi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8250 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate Court cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Sathur, Virudhunagar District, in M.C.No.153 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar West Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the authority for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8316 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 74/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch 24.01.2023 in LIR/32/SI/Dhalavaipuram/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Dhalaivaipuram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8322 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 24.01.2023 in LIR/31/SI/Dhalavaipuram/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Dhalaivaipuram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent for 75/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.8338 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 24.01.2023 in LIR/33/SI/Dhalavaipuram/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Dhalaivaipuram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.9600 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 24.01.2023 in LIR/29/SI/Dhalavaipuram/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Dhalaivaipuram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.9736 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.04.2023 in C2/MC.406/2023, this petition has been filed. The 77/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kottar Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.9872 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 12.05.2023 in LIR/17/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Aaviyur Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to 78/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.10182 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 21.04.2023 in M.C.No.74/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Thirukkurungudi Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

(ii) On that ground, this petition is liable to be allowed. But, 79/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch however, liberty is granted to the first respondent to initiate fresh action, if sufficient information is received from the second respondent, if any necessity arises.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.10482 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.04.2023 in C2/M.C.No.400 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kottar Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

80/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch Crl.O.P.(MD).No.10485 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.04.2023 in C2/M.C.No.418 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Kottar Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.10492 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 26.04.2023 in C2/M.C.No.419 of 2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector 81/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch of Police, Kottar Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.10551 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 24.01.2023 in LIR/26/SI/Dhalavaipuram/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Dhalavaipuram Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent at a specified date and time for enquiry. Except the above information no 82/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch other material has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

W.P.(MD).No.10000 of 2023:

Challenging the summon issued by the first respondent, dated 01.03.2023 in A3/MCA3/101(30)/2023, this petition has been filed. The summon reads that the information has been received from the Inspector of Police, Thiruvattar Police Station, stating that the petitioner may indulge in criminal activities causing breach of peace. On that ground, he was directed to appear before the first respondent and offer explanation as to why he should not be directed to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour. Except the above information no other material 83/86 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch has been enclosed or found, which does not satisfy the requirement of law.

19. With the above said liberty, all the petitions are allowed and the proceedings initiated by the respondents in all these petitions are hereby quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.


                                                                                             25.07.2023

                     NCC                :     Yes / No
                     Index              :     Yes / No
                     Internet           :     Yes / No
                     TM

                     To

                     1.The Sub Divisional Magistrate,
                       cum The Revenue Divisional Officer,
                       Pattukottai Sub Division,
                       Thanjavur District.

                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       Madukkur Police Station,

                     84/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                             Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch


                        Thanjavur District.

                     3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
                       Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
                       Madurai.




                     85/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                            Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch




                                                        G.ILANGOVAN,J.

                                                                             TM




                                  Crl.O.P.(MD).No.3929 of 2022 and batch




                                                                   25.07.2023




                     86/86

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court