Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
RAJESH – Appellant
Versus
THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges the order for a cash bond. (Para 2) |
| 2. court outlines legal requirements for executing peace bonds. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. citations establish precedent regarding insufficient grounds for orders. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. court sets aside the order due to lack of substantive information. (Para 10) |
ORDER
The petitioner is the counter-petitioner in M.C.
No. 826/2025 pending before the Court of the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Palakkad.
2. The petitioner has stated in the Crl.M.C. that, by Annexure 2 order, the petitioner has been directed to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a cash bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like sum for keeping peace for a period of one year as envisaged under Section 126 /129 read with 130 of the BNSS . The petitioner has been served with Annexure 1 summons to appear before the above court on 11.02.2026 at 11:00 a.m. Annexure 2 order is illegal and arbitrary and against the law laid down by this Court in Moidu vs. State of Kerala (1982 KHC 139). Therefore, Annexure 2 order may be quashed.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. In the above
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
