Madras High Court
P.Stephenraj vs The Executive Magistrate Cum on 18 April, 2023
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABL E MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
and
Crl.M.P.No.5271 of 2023
P.Stephenraj ... Petitioner
vs
1.The Executive Magistrate cum
Deputy Commissioner of Police (North),
Coimbatore City, Coimbatore.
2.The Inspector of Police,
C1, Kattor Police Station (Law & Order),
Coimbatore City, Coimbatore. ... Respondents
Prayer : Criminal Revision Case filed under section 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C,
to set aside the detention order dated 18.10.2022 passed against the
petitioner in the proceedings in Miscellaneous Petition No.5/2022 in
Na.Ka.No.169/Neer.Se.Nadu/Ka.Thu.Aa(North) Ko.Ma/2022 on the file
of the Executive Magistrate cum the Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Coimbatore District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
For petitioner : Mr.M.Dinesh
For Respondent : Mr.R.Vinothraja,
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
ORDER
Challenging the order dated 18.10.2022 passed by the 1st respondent
in M.P.No.5/2022 in Na.Ka.No.169/Neer.Se.Nadu/Ka.Thu.Aa(North)
Ko.Ma/2022, this Criminal Revision is filed by the petitioner.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 1st
respondent passed an order, by his proceedings in M.P.No.5/2022 in
Na.Ka.No.169/Neer.Se.Nadu/Ka.Thu.Aa(North) Ko.Ma/2022 dated
18.10.2022 under Section 122(1) of Cr.P.C and remanded the petitioner to
undergo imprisonment for the remaining period of the bond till
01.08.2023. This impugned order is unsustainable, in view of the
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 13.03.2023 in
Cr.R.C.No.137 of 2018 batch cases [P.Sathish @ Sathis Kumar Vs State
Rep by The Inspector of Police, Law and Order, H-4 Korukkupet Police
Station, Chennai]. Therefore, he seeks to set aside the impugned order
passed by the 1st respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
3.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the
respondent fairly conceded that the 1st respondent is not competent
authority to pass an order under Section 122(1)(b) Cr.P.C.
4.I have considered the matter in the light of submissions of the
learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.
5.On perusal of the records and the impugned order, it reveals that
the 1st respondent in pursuance of the complaint given by the 2 nd
respondent, the Inspector of Police, C1, Kattor Police Station (Law &
Order), Coimbatore City, Coimbatore proceeded the proceedings against
the petitioner under Section 110 Cr.P.C and directed to execute a bond for
keeping good behaviour, pursuant to which, he executed a bond for
keeping good behaviour on 02.08.2022. Since the petitioner has violated
the bond executed before the Executive Magistrate, the 1st respondent
proceeded against him under Section 122(1)(b) Cr.P.C and finally ordered
to remand him to undergo imprisonment for the remaining period of the
bond till 01.08.2023. The impugned order passed by the 1st respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
dated 18.10.2022 in M.P.No.5/2022 in
Na.Ka.No.169/Neer.Se.Nadu/Ka.Thu.Aa(North) Ko.Ma/2022 is
unsustainable, in view of the order of the Division Bench of this Court
dated 13.03.2023 in Cr.R.C.No.137 of 2018 batch cases [P.Sathish @
Sathis Kumar Vs State Rep by The Inspector of Police, Law and Order,
H-4 Korukkupet Police Station, Chennai], wherein, this Court relied on
the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (1982) 1 SCC 71
[Gulam Abbas Vs State of Uttar Pradesh]. In paragraph 80 (e) of the
said order dated 13.03.2023, it has been held as follows:-
“80 (e) In the light of the law laid down in
paragraph 24 of the three judge bench decision of
the Supreme Court in Gulam Abbas Vs State of
Uttar Pradesh (1982) 1 SCC 71, an Executive
Magistrate cannot authorize imprisonment under
Section 123(1)(b) for violation of a bond under
Section 107 Cr.P.C. A person who has violated the
bond executed before the Executive Magistrate
under the said provision will have to be challenged
or prosecuted before the Judicial Magistrate for
inquiry and punishment under Section
122(1)(b)Cr.P.C”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
6.In the light of the above, the 1st respondent is not competent
authority to impose any punishment under Section 122(1)(b)Cr.P.C.
Therefore, the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent is set aside and
the Criminal Revision Case is allowed. The Superintendent of Prison,
Central Prison, Coimbatore is directed to release the petitioner forthwith,
if his detention is no longer required in any other case. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
18.04.2023
srn
To
1.The Executive Magistrate cum
Deputy Commissioner of Police (North),
Coimbatore City, Coimbatore.
2.The Inspector of Police,
C1, Kattor Police Station (Law & Order),
Coimbatore City, Coimbatore.
3.The Superintendent,
Central Prison, Coimbatore.
4.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.
srn
Crl.R.C.No.684 of 2023
and
Crl.M.P.No.5271 of 2023
18.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
