The court established that detention under Section 122(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C is not applicable to bonds executed for maintaining good behaviour, only for keeping the peace.

ORDER :

(Pranay Verma, J.)

1. By this petition preferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16/4/2024 passed in Criminal Revision No.2/2024 by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Kannod, District Dewas affirming the order dated 5/4/2024 passed in Criminal Case No.01/2024 by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kannod, District Dewas whereby in exercise of power under Section 122 of the Cr.P.C, holding the petitioner to have violated the provisions of Section 117, he has been directed to be detained in prison for a period from 5/4/2024 to 30/10/2024.

2. The Station House Officer, Kannod, District Dewas submitted a report on 1/4/2024 before the Executive Magistrate, Kannod, District Dewas against the petitioner stating that he is a habitual offender and is involved in numerous offences. On 25/8/2023 Istagasa was submitted under Section 110 of the Cr.P.C on the basis of which the Executive Magistrate directed the petitioner to execute a bond for keeping peace for a period of one year by order dated 30/10/2023. In compliance of the said order the petitioner executed a bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/- under Section 117 of the Cr.P.C. Thereafter the petitioner violated the order passed by the Executive Magistrate and committed another offence under Section 13 of the Gambling Act. In the Istagasa it was stated that power under Section 122 deserves to be invoked and the petitioner deserves to be sent to the jail for the bond period.

3. On the basis of the said report the Executive Magistrate issued notice to the petitioner who appeared and filed his reply which was not found to be satisfactory by the Executive Magistrate consequent upon which he passed the order dated 5/4/2024 as aforesaid which has been affirmed in revision by the revisional Court by the impugned order.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned orders whereby the petitioner has been directed to be sent to prison for violation of the conditions of the bond are wholly without jurisdiction. The bond had been executed by the petitioner for good behaviour. For violation of the same the petitioner could not have been sent to jail since Section 122(1)(b) of the Cr.P.C was not attracted as the bond was executed for maintaining good behaviour only and not for keeping the peace. At best the amount secured by the petitioner under the bond could have been forfeited. It is hence submitted that the impugned orders deserve to be set aside.

5. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the decision of High Court of Madras in Malar @ Malarkodi V/s. The Sub- Divisional Magistrate - cum Revenue Divisional Officer, dated 31/10/2002 passed in Crl. R.C.No.1791 of 2002 and Vadivel @ Mettai Vadivel V/s. The State dated 24/11/2018 passed in Crl. R.C.No.982 of 2018.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent/State has submitted that the petitioner had executed a bond for keeping the peace and good behaviour but he had violated the same and has committed another offence under the Gambling Act, in view of which order has rightly been passed for detaining him in prison in which no error can be found in view of which the petition deserves to be dismissed.

7. I have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

8. The relevant provision of the Cr.P.C which are attracted in the present case are as under :-

"Section 107 :-

"107. Security for keeping the peace in other cases.

(1) When an Executive Magistrate receives information that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility or to do any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility and is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may, in the manner hereinafter provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond, with or without sureties,] for keeping the peace for