Puji @ Prabhakaran vs The Sub Divisional Magistrate
2023 Latest Caselaw 6494 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 6494 Mad
Judgement Date : 19 June, 2023

Madras High Court

Puji @ Prabhakaran vs The Sub Divisional Magistrate on 19 June, 2023

                                                                           Crl.R.C.No.1009 of 2023

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED: 19.06.2023

                                                         CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

                                             Crl.R.C.No.1009 of 2023 &
                                              Crl.M.P.No.8089 of 2023

                   Puji @ Prabhakaran                                            ... Petitioner

                                                          Vs.

                   State, represented by
                     1.The Sub Divisional Magistrate
                       cum Sub Collector,
                       Nagapattinam,
                       Nagapattinam District.
                   2. The Inspector of Police,
                       Velankanni Police Station,
                       Nagapattinam District                               ...   Respondents

                   PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 and 401
                   Cr.P.C., to set aside the       order passed in M.C.No.72/2022/A3 under
                   section 110 Cr.P.C., in Velankanni Police Station in Crime No.41 of
                   2023, dated 29.05.2023 on the file of the 1st respondent.


                                        For Petitioner    : Mr.T. Muruganantham

                                         For Respondents : Mr.R. Vinoth Raja,
                                                          Govt.Advocate (crl.side)


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                   1/6
                                                                            Crl.R.C.No.1009 of 2023

                                                       ORDER

Challenging the order dated 29.05.2023 passed by the 1st

respondent in M.C.No.72/2022/A3, this Criminal Revision is filed by

the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 1st

respondent, in pursuance of the complaint given by 2 nd respondent,

initiated proceedings against the petitioner and made him to execute a

bond on 10.10.2022 under section 111 of C.P.C., for maintaining good

behaviour for one year. Subsequently, a case has been registered against

the petitioner on 24.01.2023 in Cr.No. 41 of 2023 for the offence under

sections 294(b), 506(ii) IPC and 25(1)(a) Indian Arms Act. Since the

petitioner violated the bond condition, based on a complaint given by the

2nd respondent, the 1st respondent, proceeded against the petitioner

under section 122(1)(b) r/w.111, 117 of Cr.P.C., and remanded the

petitioner to prison by his proceedings in M.C.No.72/2023/A3, dated

29.05.2023 to undergo imprisonment until the expiry of the period of

bond viz., 09.10.2023.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.1009 of 2023

3. He further submitted that 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], the

impugned order passed by the 1st respondent is unsustainable,

Therefore, he seeks to set aside the impugned order passed by the 1st

respondent.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

respondents fairly conceded that the 1st respondent is not competent

authority to pass an order under Section 122(1)(b) Cr.P.C.

5.I have considered the matter in the light of submissions of the

learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

6. On perusal of the records and the impugned order, it reveals that

the 1st respondent in pursuance of a report given by the 2nd respondent-

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.1009 of 2023

Inspector of Police, Velankanni Police Station, Nagapattinam District,

initiated proceedings under section 107 of Cr.P.C., against the petitioner

and directed to him to execute a bond for keeping good behaviour under

section 110 of Cr.P.C., pursuant to which, on 10.10.2022, he executed a

bond for keeping good behaviour for a period of one year from the date

of execution of bond i.e., 10.10.2022. Since the petitioner has violated

the bond executed before the Executive Magistrate, the 1st respondent

proceeded against him under Section 122(1)(b) r/w.111, 117 of Cr.P.C

and finally remanded him to undergo imprisonment for the remaining

period of the bond till 09.10.2023.

7. It is relevant to note that in the order dated 13.03.2023 passed

by 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,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.R.C.No.1009 of 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”