ATHIANNA GOUNDER AND OTHERS Vs. NACHIAPPAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is filed by the petitioners to quash the proceedings in M.C.No.2 of 1981 on the file of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mettur. The main contention of the counsel appearing for the petitioners, and the attack on the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mettur is that the order passed by the Magistrate under S. 111, Crl.P.C. in M.C. No.2 of 1981 on 23rd February, 1981 clubs both A and B party, which is void in law. The relevant portion of the order passed by the Magistrate is as follows:

(2.) Under S. 107, Crl.P.C. if an Executive Magistrate receives information that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity or to do any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility and is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may, in the manner provided require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond with or without sureties, for keeping the peace for such period, not exceeding one year, as the Magistrate thinks fit. S. 108, Cr.P.C. contemplates passing of an order by the Magistrate for security for good behaviour from persons disseminating seditious matters. S. 109, Crl.P.C. contemplates passing of an order for security for good behaviour from suspected persons. S. 110, Cr.P.C. con templates an order from the Magistrate for obtaining security for good behaviour from habitual offenders. S. 111 reads thus: