Back
A. BADHARUDEEN
T. G. ANOOP S/O GOPI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed under Section 438 and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [hereinafter referred as ‘BNSS’ for short] to set aside order dated 03.05.2024 in M.C. No. 46/2023 on the files of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Devikulam or to remand the case for de novo trial and disposal. The petitioner herein is the counter petitioner in M.C. No. 46/2023.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor, in detail. Perused the impugned order and relevant materials available.
3. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently canvased that, before passing the order under Section 117 of Cr.P.C. the Court shall conduct an inquiry as provided under Section 116 of Cr.P.C. as to the truth of the information. In the instant case, the said procedure not properly followed by the learned Magistrate. Therefore, the order is illegal for procedural violation. He also would submit that, even though CW4 was examined as PW1 before passing the impugned order, the same lacks sufficient reasons to justify the order. Therefore, on merits also the impugned order will not stand in the eye
Procedural compliance in inquiries under the BNSS and Cr.P.C. is crucial for the legality of security orders.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of the procedural requirements under Section 107 and 111 of Cr.P.C., emphasizing the need for a full-fledged judicial enquiry ....
Point of Law : Quash of Criminal proceedings - No compliance of provision of Section 111 Cr.PC – Summons issued bad in law.
Orders related to preventive action require strict adherence to procedural law, including the disclosure of all relevant particulars; failure to do so renders the orders unsustainable.
The court established that a magistrate must provide an opportunity for the accused to be heard before taking cognizance of criminal complaints, ensuring adherence to procedural justice under Section....
The Magistrate's failure to include substantive information in peace bond orders violates statutory mandates, necessitating procedural compliance to uphold public order.
The court emphasized the necessity for judicial application of mind in issuing notices under preventive sections to protect personal liberty and avoid abuse of process.
A magistrate must provide substantive information when issuing a bond for keeping the peace, per Sections 126 and 130 of the BNSS.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
