JAMIL UI REHMAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has came up on in consequence of a report submitted by Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in exercise of his jurisdiction provided by section 438 the Criminal Procedure Code, hereinafter called the 'Code'. His order has been read out to me. I have seen the original record. I find a report was submitted to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kotwali, Delhi under the date 13th June, 1972. The first order on the record bears the date 18th August, 1972 and is in the following terms :-

(2.) Section 107(1) of the Code does not warrant a colourable use of the statute. No Magistrate would be justified in assuming jurisdiction by merely stating that there are sufficient grounds for intiating the proceedings. He has of necessity to record an order containing the grounds which may be the basis of his opinion. Only a speaking order containing the grounds will be open to judicial scrutiny. Without recording the grounds which may be determinable as sufficient grounds for initiating the proceeding the Magistrate would not be disclosing jurisdiction in himself to proceed under Sections 107/112 of the Code.

(3.) Section 112 in one part requiries that the Magistrate shall make an order in writing, setting forth the substance of the information received by him. It is on the statement of the substance of such information received by him that the Magistrate is empowered to call upon any person to show-cause why he should not be required to execute a bond in a particular amount for a particular term with a particular number of sureties of a particular class and character.