1980 Supreme(Ker) 140
Judges : T.CHANDRASEKHARA MENON
PEETHAMBARAN - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA - Respondent
Case No : Crl.M.P. No. 742 of 1980
Decided On : 07/24/1980
Advocates Appeared :
C.K. Sivasankara Panicker; V.N. Achutha Kurup; K.S. Balakrishnan; For Petitioners Public Prosecutor; For Respondents
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for credible and sufficient grounds for invoking the jurisdiction under S.107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the importance of the Magistrate's discretion based on cogent material and consideration of legal rights of the parties.
Headnote:
S.107 - Breach of Peace - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - [S.107] - The judgment discusses the application of S.107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and emphasizes the importance of credible and sufficient grounds for invoking the jurisdiction under S.107. The court highlights the need for the Magistrate to exercise discretion based on cogent material and to consider the legal rights of the parties. The judgment also emphasizes that the Magistrate should not flout civil court orders and should only take action if there is a reasonable likelihood of an imminent threat to peace. The court quashes the impugned order due to insufficient materials to support the action.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners are counter-petitioners in a case initiated under S.107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, alleging a likelihood of breach of peace at their instance. The impugned order was issued based on allegations of trespass, assault, and threat to public tranquillity. The petitioners contend that the order was issued due to political pressure and false data.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Magistrate did not apply his mind to the facts of the case and acted mechanically. It emphasized the importance of credible and sufficient grounds for invoking the jurisdiction under S.107 and highlighted the need for the Magistrate to consider the legal rights of the parties. The court quashed the impugned order due to insufficient materials to support the action.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the impugned order issued under S.107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the contention of the petitioners regarding political pressure and false data.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the Magistrate to exercise discretion based on credible and sufficient grounds, consider the legal rights of the parties, and not flout civil court orders. It highlighted that action under S.107 should only be taken if there is a reasonable likelihood of an imminent threat to peace.
Final Decision: The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was allowed, and the impugned order was quashed.
1. The petitioners in this criminal miscellaneous petition are counter-petitioners f and 4 in M. C. No. 7 of 1980 pending before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Moovattupuzha. The learned Magistrate had initiated proceedings is M. C. No. 7 of 1980 under S.107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, on a report submitted to him by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnathunad duly countersigned by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alwaye, against these petitioners and 25 others. The police report alleges that there is a likelihood of breach of peace at the instance of these petitioners and other counter-petitioners in M. C. No. 7 of 1980. In the impugned order the grounds stated are:
"The counter-petitioners are residing in North Mazhuvannoore Kara, Mazhuvannoore Village and Kunnathunad Taluk within the local limits of the jurisdiction of this Court and they are the R. S.S. Workers and followers. A case is pending against them in Crime No. 60/80 of Kunnathunad Police Station. The counter-petitioners, are on enemical terms with Sri Narayana Kaimal, the former legal heir of the Blanthevar Temple and his relatives and friends and they are threatening them. The witness No. 4 Sri Narayana Kaimal has given land for construction of a building to Khadi Board near to the temple and the Khadi Board has started construction of the building. On 10th May - 1980, the counter-petitioners 1 to 12 trespassed over the property of the Khadi Board, and assaulted the construction workers and 'threatened them with deadly weapons and also demolished a portion of the building. In this connection, a case has been registered against the counter-petitioners as Crime No. 60/80 and it is under investigation.
On 17th May 1980 at about 5a.m. the counter-petitioners gathered together in the premises of the Blanthevar Temple and assaulted Sri Narayana Kaimal, witness No. 4 Kunju Nair, witness No.5 and Govidan, witness No.6 with a stick when they go to worship in the temple and thereby caused head injury to the witnesses and they were admitted in the Government Hospital, Perumbavoor. A case has been registered against them in Crime No. 146/80 of the Kunnathunad Station and it is under investigation. If the counter-petitioners are allowed to be at large, it will lead to a serious breach of peace and public tranquillity.
In the above circumstances, the counter-petitioners found to be a nuisance in the locality and they are creating troubles and thereby causing danger to human life and public tranquillity. Hence this order."
2. The learned Magistrate has said that he is directing and requiring the counter-petitioners is the proceedings before him to attend the court and show cause why they should not be ordered to execute a bond for Rs. 2,000 with two solvent sureties for like amount for keeping the peace for a period of one year under S.107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As "it has been made to appear before him by credible information laid before the court by the Sub Inspector of Police, Kunnathunad duly countersigned by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Alwaye, that the counter-petitioners referred to above are likely to commit breach of peace or do wrongful acts by which breach of peace may probably be occasioned in Mazhuvannoore Kara and Village, in Kunnathunad Taluk within the local limits of the jurisdiction" of that court.
3. The petitioners would contend that the impugned order has been issued due to political pressure exerted on the authorities concerned and on false data furnished to the learned Magistrate. It is submitted that the property which is the subject matter of dispute is 1 acre 27 cents forming part of survey numbers 595/4B, 595/4A, 595/3A and 575/3B of Mazhuvannur Village and is part of the Mazhuvannur Blanthevar Temple premises, which according to the petitioners belongs to the N S.S. Karayogam No. 1249 and possessed by the petitioners for and on behalf of the said Karayogam. They are respectively the President and Secretary of