Orders under Section 144 of the Code cannot assume a permanent or semi-permanent character.

VINOD GOEL, J.

1. This Leave to Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 12.02.2016 passed by the Court of MM-01, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi in FIR no.47/15 whereby the respondent was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘IPC’).

2. Facts leading to the filing of the present Leave to Appeal are that on 22.01.2015 at about 5 PM, the respondent who is the landlord of house bearing no.203/1, Bhopa Mohalla, Fateh Beri under the jurisdiction of PS Fatehpur Beri was found to have not got verified the details of his tenant from the police in accordance with Order no.67397-496/SD(X) dated 22.12.2014 passed by Shri Prem Nath, DCP, South and therefore the FIR no.47/2015 was registered against the respondent under Section 188 of the IPC.

3. On filing of charge sheet, a notice under Section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘the Code’) was framed on 15.12.2015 by the learned MM to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined one witness to bring home the guilt of the accused.

4. PW-1 ACP S.P Tyagi in his testimony proved on record the successive orders being order no.67731-67831/SD(X) dated 25.12.2013 passed by B. Shankar Jaiswal, DCP, South, Ex PW1/A, order no.9363-9463/SD(X) dated 21.02.2014 passed by Shri B. Shankar Jaiswal, DCP, South, Ex PW1/B, order no.21276-376/SD(X) dated 23.04.2014 passed by P.S Kushwah, officiating DCP, South, Ex PW1/C, order no.29727-29827/SD(X) dated 23.06.2014 passed by B. Shankar Jaiswal, DCP, South, Ex PW1/D, order no. 42198-42298/SD(X) dated 25.08.2014 passed by B. Shankar Jaiswal, DCP, South, Ex PW1/E, order no.54239-339/SD(X) dated 22.10.2014 passed by Prem Nath, DCP, South, Ex PW1/F and order no.67397-496/SD(X) dated 22.12.2014 passed by Prem Nath, DCP, South, Ex PW1/G. The MM found the order no. 67397-496/SD(X) dated 22.12.2014 passed by Shri Prem Nath, DCP, South to be illegal in view of the judgment of the Hon’be Supreme Court in Acharya Jagdishwaranand Avadhuta & others v. Commissioner of Police, Calcutta & another, (1983) 4 SCC 522.

5. The learned APP for the State had argued that the impugned judgment is not based on a correct appreciation of law and therefore warrants interference.

6. The APP argued that the order no. 67397-496/SD(X) dated 22.12.2014 passed by Shri Prem Nath, DCP, South is not illegal as held by the MM as it was issued keeping in view the threat raised by terrorists seeking residence in the capital.

7. The APP further argued that the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Acharya Jagdishwarand’s case (supra) has become outdated as it does not envisage a situation where the country faces a threat due to terrorist activities and therefore such successive orders issued by the DCP become a necessity in the current facts and circumstances.

8. I have the learned APP for the State.

9. It is deemed appropriate to reproduce Section 188 of the IPC:-

“188. Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant.— Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or to take certain order with certain property in his possession or under his management, disobeys such direction, shall, if such disobedience causes or tends to cause obstruction, annoyance or injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury, to any persons lawfully employed, be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both;

and if such disobedience causes or tends to cause danger to human life, health or safety, or causes or tends to cause a riot or affray, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

Explanation.—It is not necessary that the offender should intend