SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(P&H) 929

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Augustine George Masih, J.
Anoop Singh - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and Ors. - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 7832 of 2015
Decided On : 29-05-2015

Advocates:
For the Appellant :Vivek Salathia, Advocate
For the Respondents:Puneet Kaur Sekhon, Additional Advocate General

The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 122(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, emphasizing the distinction between bonds for keeping peace and maintaining good behavior, and the violation of fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:

Illegal Detention - Code of Criminal Procedure - Section 122(1)(b) - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of Section 122(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which deals with imprisonment in default of security. The judgment highlighted the distinction between bonds for keeping peace and maintaining good behavior, emphasizing that the detention order was without authority of law as it applied only to a bond for keeping peace and not for good behavior.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a habitual offender involved in illegal liquor trade, was detained in Central Jail Amritsar based on an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police-cum-Executive Magistrate. The petitioner challenged the detention, alleging violation of the provisions of Section 122(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and deprivation of personal liberty without following due procedure established by law.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the impugned orders of detention were in violation of the powers conferred upon the Executive Magistrate under Section 122(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The court declared the detention illegal and in gross violation of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Issues: The issues involved the legality of the detention order under Section 122(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the distinction between bonds for keeping peace and maintaining good behavior, and the deprivation of the petitioner's fundamental rights.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Section 122(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which applies only to a bond for keeping peace and not for good behavior. The court also relied on the constitutional validity of Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as upheld by the Supreme Court in Madhu Limaye v. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Monghyr.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the impugned orders of detention were quashed. The petitioner was ordered to be released from custody, and the State of Punjab was directed to pay compensation amounting to ₹5 lakhs to the petitioner within two months.

Augustine George Masih, J.:-

1. Petitioner has approached this Court praying for quashing of the order dated 21.11.2014 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police-cum-Executive Magistrate, Amritsar-respondent No. 3 by which the petitioner has been ordered to be detained in Central Jail Amritsar and the order dated 12.03.2015 (Annexure P-2) passed by the District Magistrate, Amritsar, rejecting the appeal of the petitioner. Petitioner has also prayed for fixing liability upon the erring Government officials including respondent No. 3 and for grant of adequate compensation on account of he being illegally detained depriving him of his personal liberty without following due procedure established by law.

2. Petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition alleging illegal detention on the basis of the impugned orders passed by respondents 2 and 3 asserting that the same are not in accordance with law and the procedure as prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.').

3. Petitioner is a habitual offender and is involved in illegal trade of illicit liquor against whom five cases have been registered under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (hereinafter referred to as 'Excise Act') at Police Station Maqboolpura, District Amritsar, out of which in two cases, he has been convicted and the other three are under investigation A report bearing No. 33 dated 01.06.2014 under Section 41(2)/110 of the Criminal Procedure Code was presented by the Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station Maqboolpura, Amritsar and the petitioner was produced before the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police-cum-Executive Magistrate on 25.07.2014. On the said date, petitioner was heard and after perusal of the records and the statement of the witnesses, he was bound by respondent No. 3 for good behaviour in future on submission of surety bond amounting to ` 2 lakhs for a period of one year. Petitioner executed a bond for good behaviour for the said amount in compliance with the order dated 25.07.2014 (Annexure R-2).

4. After the execution of the said bond for keeping good behaviour, which was in Form No. 3, as contained in Second Schedule to the Cr.P.C., F.I.R. No. 117 dated 21.10.2014 was registered at Police Station Maqboolpura, Amritsar against the petitioner under Section 61 of the Excise Act as he was found in possession of 36 bottles of English whiskey brand 'CASH'. In the said F.I.R. though the petitioner was released on bail by the Investigating Officer being a bailable offence. However, a report dated 27.10.2014 was received from the SHO, Police Station Maqboolpura, Amritsar by the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police-cum-Executive Magistrate, Amritsar, wherein mention of DDR No. 33 dated 01.06.2014 was made and it was stated that since F.I.R. No. 117 dated 21.10.2014 stands registered against the petitioner during the period when the petitioner was required to maintain good conduct and behaviour as per the order dated 25.07.2014 (Annexure R-2), action be taken against him.

5. The Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, City I, issued warrant of arrest against the petitioner as also notice to the sureties by order dated 29.10.2014 for 20.11.2014. As the warrant and notice had been received unexecuted, fresh warrant against the petitioner and notice to the sureties were issued for 04.12.2014. Petitioner was arrested by the SHO, Police Station, Maqboolpura, Amritsar City and was produced before respondent No. 3 on 21.11.2014. On that very day, respondent No. 3, taking the aid of the provisions of Section 122 Cr.P.C., ordered detention of the petitioner for the remaining period of bond, for which the petitioner was bound down to maintain good conduct in exercise of the powers under Section 122(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C. (Annexure P-1). Petitioner was accordingly lodged in Central Jail, Amritsar on 21.11.2014 and since then is in judicial custody.

6. Petitioner challenged this ord



































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top