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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48793

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S. DIAS, J
ROLLAND – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sri.C.Rajendran
For the Respondents: Smt.Seetha S

ORDER

The petitioner is the counter petitioner in M.C.No.432/2025 pending before the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kollam.

2. The petitioner has been served with Annexure-A1 preliminary order calling upon him to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to keep peace for a period of one year as contemplated under Section 126 read with Section 130 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (‘ BNSS ’, in short).

3. The petitioner contends that Annexure-A1 order is unsustainable in law because the Sub Divisional Magistrate has not set forth the substance of the information in the said order, which is mandatory under Section 126 read with Section 130 of the BNSS , and the law laid down by this Court inMoidu vs. State of Kerala ( 1982 KHC 139 ). Therefore, Annexure-A1 order may be quashed.

4. Heard; Sri.C. Rajendran, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Seetha S, the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. In the above context it is necessary to refer to Sections 126 and 130 of the BNSS , which corresponds to the erstwhile Sections 107 and 111 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,which reads a

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top