Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
SAJUMON P P – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. validity of preliminary orders under the bnss. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on the necessity of substantial information. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's observation on previous rulings regarding necessary information. (Para 6 , 7 , 9) |
ORDER
The petitioner is the counter-petitioner in M.C. No.
406/2025 pending before the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kottayam.
2. The petitioner has been served with Annexure A5 preliminary order calling upon him to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond for Rs.75,000/- 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 A5 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-I order may be quashed.
4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and 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
