SURYA Vs. SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been filed to quash the impugned orders dated 18.07.2020 in M.C.Nos.14, 15 and 13 of 2020 respectively, passed by the first respondent under Section 122(l)(b) of Cr.P.C, thereby cancelled bond executed by the petitioner in all petitions and detained them till the completion of bond period.

(2.) The petitioner in all the petitions had executed bound under Section 110 of Cr.P.C, to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties each for Rs.50,000/- to be of good behaviour for one year as directed by the first respondent herein on 02.07.2020. While being so on 10.07.2020, the petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody in pursuant to the Crime No. 1826 of 2020 registered for the offences under Sections 294(b), 341, 387 and 506(2) of IPC r/w Section 4 of Tamil nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act. Thereafter it was informed to the first respondent by the second respondent and the first respondent passed the impugned order dated 18.07.2020, thereby sentenced the petitioner in all the petitions, to undergo imprisonment for remaining period of bond executed by the petitioners herein ie., upto 01.07.2021.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in all the petitions raised a ground that the petitioners were not served with any show cause notice and they were not heard before passing orders as such, it is completely violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned orders are illegal and violation of procedure laid down under law. He also relied upon the order passed by this Court dated 19.03.2020 in CrlO.P.No.6467 of 2019 in the case of Nedumaran Vs. The Sub Divisional Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer and ors., and sought for quash of the impugned orders.