Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: Recount in Devi vs The Executive Magistrate-Cum on 3 January, 2020Matching Fragments
6 The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1861, and the subsequent Codes vested the Magistrates, both Executive and Judicial, with powers to prevent breach of the peace and for keeping a watch on the behaviour of habitual offenders. The evolution of these provisions has been set out in detail in the Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court in Aldanish Rein vs. State of NCT of Delhi and another1 and it will, therefore, be superfluous to recount them here. Suffice it to say that under the 1898 Code, both the executive officers and judicial officers were exercising powers under Part IV - Prevention of Offences - Chapter VIII – Of security for keeping the peace and for good behaviour. In fact, during the reign of the Raj, the Executive Magistrates, including the District Collectors, were exercising these powers against freedom fighters in order to protect the commercial interest of the ruling English class. Nevertheless, even during these times, the police were not given these powers as could be seen from the provisions of the District Police Act, 1859 and the City Police Act, 1888. In fact, even prior 1 2018 SCC OnLine 12207 http://www.judis.nic.in to the coming into force of the Evidence Act, 1872, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1861, made confession to police irrelevant and inadmissible, save only for proving the discovery of a fact. The relevant provisions in the District Police Act, 1859 and the City Police Act, 1888, will be discussed in detail below. Suffice it to say here that what the Raj loathed to do, the Indian State now does with the least compunction.