[Cites 9, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Mohammed Yusaf vs The Sub Divisional Magistrate on 8 April, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 3195 OF 2026 1
2026:KER:31456
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1948
CRL.MC NO. 3195 OF 2026
IN MC NO.1001 OF 2026 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TIRUR
PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER:
MOHAMMED YUSAF
AGED 45 YEARS
SON OF MOHAMMEDALI, KALIYARVATTATHU HOUSE,
VALIYAKUNNU P.O., MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676552
BY ADVS. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ
SHRI.IRFAN ZIRAJ
RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT:
1 THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE
TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676101
2 THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
VALANCHERY POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676552
3 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF
KERALA AT ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
BY SRI.M.P.PRASANTH, SENIOR PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 3195 OF 2026 2
2026:KER:31456
ORDER
Dated this the 08th day of April, 2026
The petitioner is the counter petitioner in
M.C.No.1001/2026 on the file of the Court of the Sub
Divisional Magistrate, Tirur.
2. The petitioner asserts that he has been
served with Annexure-1 order directing 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 read with Section 130 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ('BNSS', in
short).
3. The petitioner contends that Annexure-1
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 in Moidu vs. State of Kerala
2026:KER:31456
(1982 KHC 139). Therefore, Annexure-A1 preliminary order
may be quashed.
4. Heard; Sri.P.M.Ziraj, the learned Counsel for
the petitioner and Sri.M.P.Prasanth, 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 sufficiency and fitness of sureties".
CRL.MC NO. 3195 OF 2026 4
2026:KER:31456
6. The above provisions explicitly postulates
that the Executive Magistrate, on receiving information that
any person is likely to commit a breach of peace, disturb the
public tranquility or does any wrongful act, and that there
are sufficient grounds to proceed against him, the Executive
Magistrate may, in the manner provided under Chapter IX
of the BNSS, require such person to show cause why he
should not be ordered to execute a bond or bail bond for his
good behavior for such period, not exceeding one year
provided an order in writing is passed, setting forth the
substance of information received, the amount of bond to be
executed, the term for which it is to be in force and the
number of sureties.
7. It is the petitioner's case that, the Sub
Divisional Magistrate has passed Annexure-1 order without
furnishing the substance of information. Instead, the Sub
Divisional Magistrate has merely stated that the petitioner
is involved in the crimes registered by the Police.
CRL.MC NO. 3195 OF 2026 5
2026:KER:31456
8. In Jayanth K. C. v. State of Kerala (2025
KHC 1591), this Court has held that mere registration of a
crime and an anticipation of possible violence, without
imminent threat to peace, is insufficient to justify an order
under Section 111 of the Cr.P.C.
9. Similarly in Girish P. and others v. State
of Kerala and another (2009 (4) KHC 929), this Court has
held that unless the substance of information is stated in an
order passed under Section 111 of the Cr.P.C, the order
passed under Section 107 of the Cr.P.C., is bad in law.
In light of the principles laid down in the afore-cited
decisions and the fact that substance of information is
conspicuously absent in Annexure- 1 order, I am satisfied
that the Crl.M.C. is to be allowed. Accordingly Annexure-1
order is set aside. The Sub Divisional Magistrate is directed
to reconsider the matter as per the mandate under Sections
126 and 130 of the BNSS and in accordance with law.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
NAB
2026:KER:31456
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 3195 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.3.2026 IN
M.C.NO. 1001/2026 ISSUED BY THE FIRST
RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER
ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN MOIDU VS. STATE
OF KERALA REPORTED IN 1982 KLT 578(FB)
ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN AHAMMED KABEER
VS. STATE OF KERALA REPORTED IN 2014(2) KLT
SN5 (C NO.9)
ANNEXURE 4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.10.2023 IN
CRL.M.C 6684 OF 2023 OF THIS HONOURABLE
COURT
ANNEXURE 5 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
18.8.2023 IN CRL.M.C 6687 OF 2023 OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT
ANNEXURE 6 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT DATED 28.2.2024 IN
CRL.M.APPL.NO.1/2024 IN CRL.MC NO. 1998 OF
ANNEXURE 7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.2.2026 IN
CRL.MC NO. 5639 OF 2025 OF THIS HONOURABLE
COURT
ANNEXURE 8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE
COURT DATED 24.10.2025 IN
