Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Sub-section (3) of that section reads-

"(3) Pending the completion of the inquiry under sub-section (1), the Magistrate, if he considers that immediate measures are necessary for the prevention of a breach of the peace or disturbance of the public tranquillity or the commission of any offence or for the public safety, may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, direct the person in respect of whom the order under section 112 has been made to execute a bond, with or without sureties, for keeping the peace or maintaining good behavior until the conclusion of the inquiry, and may detain him in custody until such bond is executed or, in default of execution untill the inquiry is conclued:* * *" (The remaining portion is not necessary for our present purpose).
Sub-section (3) of section 117 in such circumstances empowers the Magistrate, if he considers that immediate measures are necessary for prevention of a breach of the peace or disturbance of the public tranquillity or the commission of any offence the public safety, for reasons to be recorded in wiring to direct the person in respect of whom the order under section 112 has been made to execute a bond with or without sureties for keeping the peace or maintaining food behavior untill the conclusion of the enquiry and to detain him in custody, untill such bonds is executed or, in default of execution, until the inquiry is concluded.
Until he had done so, his powers of remanding the detenus to custody under sub-section (3) of section 117 of the code of Criminal Procedure did not vest in him and could not be exercised by him even if any order under section 112 of the Code had not been prepared by him earlier before these persons were taken in to custody by the police the magistrate should have summoned these persons so that they could be produced before him and the order could be read out to them under section 114 of the code of Criminal Procedure In either, case, no warrants for remanding these persons for custody in jail could have been issued by the Magistrate untill he had already made an order under section 112 of the Code and had read out the contents of it to the persons concerned under section 113 or section 114 of the code of Criminal Procedure. Even thereafter, it was incumbent on the Magistrate under sub-section (3) of Section 117 of the Code to come to a finding that immediate measures were necessary for prevent upon of the breach of the peace or disturbance of the public tranquillity and thereupon to direct these detnus to execute bonds with or without sureties for keeping the peace untill the conclusion of the enquiry..
After the Magistrate had taken all these steps, he could then direct detention of these persons in custody untill such bonds were executed or untill the conclusions of the enquiry in case no such bonds were executed."

(10) The learned Government counsel contended before me that it is likely that the police officers had arrested the petitioners as they knew that they had designed to commit some cognizable offence. The police officers do not say so. What they stated in their affidavits, runs counter to that contention. This is something totally new. I do not know how the government counsel is able to put forward that contention. Obviously he is somehow trying to justify the illegal detention of the petitioners.