Madras High Court
Arumugasamy vs The Sub Divisional Executive ... on 8 November, 2022
Crl. R.C. (MD)No.964 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATE : 08.11.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
CRL. R.C.(MD)No.964 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P.(MD)No.11902 of 2022
Arumugasamy .. Petitioner
- Vs -
1.The Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate cum
Sub Collector,
Sivakasi,
Virudhunagar District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Sivakasi Town Police Station,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Maraneri Police Station,
Virudhunagar District. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed u/s 401 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, to call for the entire records in relating tot he impugned order
dated 29.08.2022 made in M.C.No.16/2022 on the file of the first
respondent and to set aside the same as arbitrary and to set the petitioner at
his liberty.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
For Petitioner : Mr.M.S.Jeyakarthik
For Respondents : Mr.S.Manikandan
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This revision petition has been filed against the order passed by the
first respondent herein in M.C.No.16 of 2022, dated 29.08.2022.
2.The brief facts are:
The revision petitioner had executed a bond on 15.12.2021 in
M.C.No.16 of 2022 to keep good behavior. But, violating the aforesaid
bond that was executed by him, the petitioner indulged in crime, which was
registered in Crime No.62 2022 under Sections 294(b), 341, 342, 307 of
IPC. As per the report submitted by the Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town,
proceeding under Section 122 (1) (b) of Cr.P.C., was initiated against the
revision petitioner.
3.On the side of the prosecution, two witnesses were examined and
they were also examined by the revision petitioner through his advocate. At
the conclusion of enquiry, it was found that the petitioner was already
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
facing charges in Crime No.1104 of 2020 for the offence under Section 147,
148 and 302 of IPC, Crime No.38 of 2018 for the offence under Section
294(b) of IPC and in Crime No.305 of 2019 for the offence under Section
109 of IPC and hence, the petitioner was ordered to be in imprisonment till
14.02.2023.
4. Challenging the aforesaid order, this revision has been preferred
mainly on the ground that in LIR No.3 of 2022, proceedings were initiated
under Section 110 (e) of Cr.P.C., and hence, he executed a bond for keeping
good behavior on 15.12.2021.
5. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner submitted that
against the bond that was executed under Section 110 (e) of Cr.P.C.,
proceeding under Section 122(1)(b) of Cr.P.C is not liable. For that
purpose, he straight away relied upon an unreported judgment of this Court
in Devi Vs. The Executive Magistrate cum Deputy Commissioner of
Police, St. Thomas Mount District and others in Crl.R.C.No.78 of 2020,
dated 25.09.2020. In the said case, two issues were taken up. The first
issue is whether violation of bond, which was executed under Section
110(e) of Cr.P.C., is amenable for proceedings under Section 122(1)(b) of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Cr.P.C., and the second issue is whether the Deputy commissioner of Police
is competent to initiate action under the above said provision.
6. With regard to the second issue, we are not concerned. Regarding
the first issue only, we are concerned. Hence, this Court straight away went
to the observation, that has been made with regard to the second issue, that
for the breach of bond that is executed for maintaining good behavior under
Section 110(e) Cr.P.C., no proceedings will lie under Section 122 (1)(b) of
Cr.P.C.. Because the aforesaid proceedings can be initiated only when,
there is breach of bond, which was executed for keeping peace. Noting that
the coordinate bench of this Court has taken a contra view with regard to the
aforesaid issue, now the matter is pending before the larger bench. Till the
authoritative pronouncement is made in this regard, this happens to be the
latest judgment to be followed.
7. The present case on hand is also with regard to the execution of
bond under Section 110(e) Cr.P.C.. As noted above, on the violation of the
bond for keeping good behavior, proceedings under Section 122 (1)(b)
Cr.P.C., is not amenable. So, on this ground, the revision preferred by the
revision petitioner is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, this revision
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released forthwith, if he
is not required in any other cases. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition is also closed.
08.11.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
ta
To
1.The Sub Divisional Executive Magistrate cum
Sub Collector,
Sivakasi,
Virudhunagar District.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Sivakasi Town Police Station,
Virudhunagar District.
3.The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Maraneri Police Station,
Virudhunagar District.
Mayanur Police Station,
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.ILANGOVAN, J.
ta
CRL. R.C.(MD)No.964 of 2022
08.11.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
