Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.24 seconds)Section 111 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Gireesh K P vs State Of Kerala on 16 March, 2022
9.On perusing Annexure-VI order, it is evident that the Sub
Divisional Magistrate has disregarded the statutory
mandate and has invoked powers vested on him in a
callous manner. The mere fact that the petitioner is
involved in two crimes could not have been taken as the
basis to issue a preventive order against the petitioner
herein. (see Santhosh M.V. and others v. State of
Kerala [2014 (3) KLT 837; Girish P and Others v. State
of Kerala [2009 (4) KHC 929]). The reasons which led
the Sub Divisional Magistrate to initiate proceeding is not
disclosed in the order. In the absence of any evidence
Crl.M.C.5919/2016 7
rendering a breach of peace probable, a Magistrate is not
justified in calling upon parties, to show cause why he
should not enter into recognisances, and on his failure , to
make an order under the section.
K.Moidu vs State Of Kerala on 26 June, 2009
(see Moidu v. State of
Kerala [1982 KLT 578]. It is also not open to the
Magistrate to draw up proceedings against persons under
Section 107 based on vague hunches or general
statements. Annexure-VI order does not state in what
way or with reference to what matter the petitioner was
likely to commit a breach or peace. There was no tangible
evidence before the learned Magistrate that some definite
Act is contemplated, which Act, if committed, is likely to
cause breach of peace. Annexure-VI order does not fulfill
the requirement under Section 111 and reveals total non
application of mind.
Section 116 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Madhu Limaye vs Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Monghyr & ... on 28 October, 1970
8.In Madhu Limaye and Another v. SDM, Monghyr [AIR
1971 SC 2486] the Apex Court, in para 36 of the
judgment, had cautioned the Executive Magistrate
Crl.M.C.5919/2016 5
exercising powers under Section 107 in the following
manner:-
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
M.V.Santhosh vs State Of Kerala on 15 July, 2013
9.On perusing Annexure-VI order, it is evident that the Sub
Divisional Magistrate has disregarded the statutory
mandate and has invoked powers vested on him in a
callous manner. The mere fact that the petitioner is
involved in two crimes could not have been taken as the
basis to issue a preventive order against the petitioner
herein. (see Santhosh M.V. and others v. State of
Kerala [2014 (3) KLT 837; Girish P and Others v. State
of Kerala [2009 (4) KHC 929]). The reasons which led
the Sub Divisional Magistrate to initiate proceeding is not
disclosed in the order. In the absence of any evidence
Crl.M.C.5919/2016 7
rendering a breach of peace probable, a Magistrate is not
justified in calling upon parties, to show cause why he
should not enter into recognisances, and on his failure , to
make an order under the section.
1