KRISHNASAMY THEVAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The counter petitioners in M.C. No. 29 / 93 on the file of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kovilpatti, have filed this petition under S. 482, Cr.P.C. praying to call for the records in the above case and to quash the same.

(2.) Short facts are : The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kovilpatti, has passed the impugned order under S. 111, Cr.P.C. acting under S.107, Cr.P.C. on 21-6-1993 against the counter petitioners, in which he has directed them to appear before him on 21-6-l 993 at 10 a.m. and show cause as to why they should not be ordered to execute bond for Rs. 5,000 / - with two sureties for the like sum each and to keep peace and be of good behaviour for a period of one year and also why they should not be ordered to execute interim bond till the disposal of the case.

(3.) I have heard Miss N. S. Nappinai for the petitioners. She would submit that the impugned order is infirm for the following two reasons viz., (i) the order acting under S. 107, Cr.P.C. cannot ask the counter petitioners to show cause as to why the bond should not be executed to be of good behaviour; and (ii) interim bond cannot be directed to be executed. I have heard Mr. Raja, learned Government Advocate on the above aspects. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel.