Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
AKHIL ANTONY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to preliminary order's validity. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. requirement for magistrates to substantiate orders. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. precedence set by case law on insufficient grounds for order. (Para 8 , 9) |
C.S.DIAS, J.
------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C. No. 5890 of 2025 --------------------------------------------
Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2026 ORDER The petitioner is the counter petitioner in M.C.No.317/2025 on the file of the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kollam.
2. The petitioner has averred in the Crl.M.C. that he 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 sum for the purpose of keeping peace for a period of one year as envisaged 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
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
