MOHAMMEDALI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have approached this Court with a request that the powers under S.482 CrPC. may be invoked to quash the proceedings in M.C.5/03 initiated by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Perinthalmanna against them under S.107 CrPC. Annexure - A order under S.107 read with S.111 CrPC. has been issued against the petitioners and two others, calling upon them to show cause why they should not be ordered to execute bond for Rs.10,000/- with two solvent sureties with like sum for keeping peace for a period of one year under S.107 CrPC. The petitioners (first among them is an Advocate) did not appear before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and have instead, moved this Court by filing this petition.

(2.) The learned Public Prosecutor was directed to take instructions. The file of the Sub Divisional Magistrate has been produced before this Court. It shows that FIR under S.107 CrPC. was registered on 19.2.2003. It was registered suo motu by the Sub Inspector of Police of the Melattur Police Station. He conducted necessary enquiries. After such enquiries, a report has been filed by the Sub Inspector of Police through the Deputy Superintendent of Police before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. In the report it is reported that apprehension of breach of peace is perceived by the police. The reasons thereof are also mentioned. The Sub Divisional Magistrate after perusing the report and various documents produced along with the report had further recorded the statement on oath of the Sub Inspector and it was thereafter that the decision to proceed under S.107 CrPC. was taken.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners assails the impugned order on various grounds. At the very outset, I must take note of the broad purpose and object of proceedings under S.107 CrPC. It is not a punitive proceedings. Proceedings are primarily meant for maintenance of peace and tranquility in the locality. An order under S.107 CrPC. read with S.111 only calls upon the persons proceeded against to show cause why they should not be directed to execute a bond to keep the peace. I am in total agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioners that sufficient and cogent reasons must be available, before the Executive Magistrate can call upon a person to execute such a warrant. The powers cannot be lightly invoked. It certainly is an interference with the rights and liberty of an individual. Therefore, careful application of mind is certainly necessary.