Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 3311
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J
Sumitra Dhal – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
CRLMC No.1410 of 2026 | Criminal Misc. Case No. 84 of 2026
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Preventive Proceedings
Act Referred
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The petitioners received a show-cause notice dated 14.04.2026 from the learned Executive Magistrate, Tihidi, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 84 of 2026 initiated under Section 126 of the BNSS based on information from the I.I.C., Tihidi Police Station. The notice directed them to show cause why they should not execute bonds of Rs. 5,000 each for keeping peace for one year, but did not disclose the substance of the information.
Findings of Court:
The High Court held that the impugned notice failed to disclose the substance of the information as required by Section 130, and therefore the initiation of proceedings under Section 126 could not be sustained. The proceeding and notice were quashed, leaving it open to authorities to proceed after due compliance.
Issues: Whether the show-cause notice and consequent proceeding under Section 126 BNSS are vitiated for non-compliance with Section 130 BNSS for failure to set forth the substance of information.
Ratio Decidendi: The requirement under Section 130 to set forth the substance of information is mandatory and foundational; its non-compliance invalidates the initiation of proceedings under Section 126. The expression 'substance' means the essence of the information, and the notice must give proper notice of the grounds for action.
Result: CRLMC allowed; impugned proceeding and notice quashed.
For Petitioners: Mr. Sukanta Kumar Nayak, Adv.
For Opposite Party: Mr. Tej Kumar, ASC
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts and procedural history: the petition seeks quashing of preventive proceedings initiated under section 126 bnss based on a show-cause notice that allegedly lacked substance of information. (Para 1) |
Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.
1. The petitioners, in the present petition, seek quashing of the proceeding in Criminal Misc. Case No. 84 of 2026, initiated under Section 126 of the BNSS by the learned Executive Magistrate, Tihidi,
against them.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX
2. The petitioners received a show-cause notice dated 14.04.2026 issued by the learned Executive Magistrate, Tihidi.
3. Upon receipt of the said notice, the petitioners came to know that Criminal Misc. Case No. 84 of 2026 had been initiated against them
Page 1
Signature Not Verified Digitaly Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT,
CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15
under Section 126 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) by the learned Executive Magistrate, Tihidi, on the basis of
information received from the I.I.C., Tihidi Police Station.
4. The said notice indicated that, on the basis of the aforesaid information, a proceeding under Section 126 of the BNSS had been initiated against the petitioners for keeping peace and tranquillity in
the locality.
5. The petitioners were directed to submit their show-cause reply and appear on 07.05.2026 as to why they should not be ordered to execute a bond of Rs. 5,000/- each with one local surety for the like amount for
keeping peace and tranquillity in the locality for a period of one year.
II. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONERS
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners made the following submissions in support of his contentions:
i. The petitioners submitted that as per Section 130 of the BNSS, the learned Magistrate is required to mention the substance of the information received while issuing a show-cause notice. However, in the present case, the show-cause notice does not disclose the substance of the information on the basis of which the proceeding has been initiated. As a result, the petitioners are unable to effectively
submit their reply to the said show-cause notice.
ii. The petitioners asserted that it is a settled principle of law that the learned Magistrate is under a duty to conduct some enquiry so as to
Page 2
Signature Not Verified Digitaly Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT,
CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15
be satisfied with the material existing regarding the necessity of proceeding under Section 126 of the BNSS. However, the same having not been done by the learned Executive Magistrate, Tihidi, the
proceeding has been initiated without competency.
iii. The petitioners asserted that in the show-cause notice, the learned Executive Magistrate, Tihidi has neither given any opinion that there is sufficient ground to believe that the petitioners, who are alleged delinquents, are disturbing or creating a law and order situation in the locality, nor has the substance of the information been disclosed, which is mandatory under Section 126 read with Section 130 of the
BNSS.
iv. The petitioners asserted that they are innocent persons and are in no way connected with any other cases.
v. The petitioners further asserted that it is necessary in the interest of justice that this Court be pleased to quash the show-cause notice issued by the learned Executive Magistrate, Tihidi in Criminal Misc.
Case No. 84 of 2026.
vi. In order to buttress their arguments, the petitioners placed reliance on the observations of the Supreme Court in Madhu Limaye & Others v.
Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Monghyr & Others1
Page 3
Signature Not Verified Digitaly Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT,
CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 17:14:15
III. SUBMISSIONS OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite parties made the following submissions in support of his contentions:
