The Executive Magistrate must provide substantive grounds for issuing peace bonds, failing which orders may be set aside.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS THURSDAY, THE 29^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 9TH MAGHA, 1947 CRL.MC NO. 787 OF 2026 IN ORDER DATED 24.06.2025 PRELIMINARY ORDER IN M.C. NO.54/2025 PASSED BY THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATES COURT, ADOOR PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER:

AKASH SIVANANDHAN AGED 33 YEARS SON OF P.K. SIVANANDAN, SIVAGANGA, NELLIKKALA POST, MALLAPUZHASSERY, ELANTHUR, PATHANAMTHITTA, KERALA., PIN - 689643 BY ADVS.

SHRI.BALAMURALI K.P.

SMT.HARIPRIYA.M SHRI.MOHAMMED ASHIQ R.S.

SHRI.SHAJI T.M.

SMT.AISHWARYA M. S.

SMT.KHADEEJATH RUKSANA K.

SHRI.SREEJITH.M.R RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & STATE:

1 THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE ADOOR, O/O. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA, PARASS LA, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 691523

2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER ARANMULA POLICE STATION, ARANMULA, MALLAPUZHASSERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 689533

3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 PP SRI M P PRASANTH THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

29.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

C.S.DIAS, J.

---------------------------------------------

Crl.M.C.No.787 of 2026 ------------------------------------------------

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2026

ORDER

The petitioner is the counter petitioner in M.C.

No.54 of 2025 on the file of the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Adoor.

2. The petitioner has been served with Annexure 1 preliminary order, calling upon him to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for Rs.50,000/- 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 r/w Section 130 of the BNSS .

3. The petitioner contends that Annexure 1 order is unsustainable in law because the Sub Divisional Magistrate has not set forth substance of information, which is mandatory under Section 126 read with Section 130 of the BNSS , and the law laid down by this Court in Moidu vs. State of Kerala ( 1982 KHC 139 ). Therefore, Annexure-A1 order may be quashed.

4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and 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 as follows:

“126. (1) When an Executive Magistrate receives information that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity 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 or bail bond for keeping the peace for such period, not exceeding one year, as the Magistrate thinks fit.

(2) Proceedings under this section may be taken before any Executive Magistrate when either the place where the breach of the peace or disturbance is apprehended is within his local jurisdiction or there is within such jurisdiction a person who is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity or to do any wrongful act as aforesaid beyond such jurisdiction.

130. When a Magistrate acting under section 126, section 127, section 128 or section 129, deems it necessary to require any person to show cause under such section, he shall make an order in writing, setting forth the substance of the information received, the amount of the bond to be executed, the term for which it is to be in force and the number of sureties, after considering the suffici