Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
KARTHIKA PRADEEP – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the importance of detailing information in court orders. (Para 2 , 4) |
| 2. the necessary procedural safeguards in issuing peace bonds. (Para 3 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. judicial scrutiny when no immediate threat to peace exists. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 4. final directive to quash the inadequate order and enforce legal compliance. (Para 9) |
ORDER
The petitioner is the counter petitioner in M.C.No.461/2025 pending before the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Fort Cochin.
2. The petitioner has been served with Annexure-I order calling upon her to attend the Court and to execute a cash bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount for keeping peace for a period of one year as contemplated under Section 129 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘ BNSS ’, in short). The petitioner contends that Annexure-I 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 , and the law laid down by this Court in Moidu vs. State of Kerala ( 1982 KHC 139 ). Therefore, Annexure-I order may be quashed.
3. Heard; Smt.Ipsita Ojal, the
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
