JITENDRA R DESHPRABHU Vs. EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the petitioners are questioning the legality and propriety of the order of the Executive Magistrate, Pernem, dated 1st August, 1990, in Case No. JM/mag/39/90 and for quashing the proceedings initiated thereunder.

(2.) BY the Order dated 1st August, 1990 issued under section 111 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the Executive Magistrate, the petitioners are directed to attend the Court of the Executive Magistrate on the 9th day of August, 1990, to show cause as to why they should not be required to enter into a bond of Rs. 10,000/- each and also give sureties each by a bond of like amount under section 107 of the Criminal Procedure Code to maintain peace for a term of one year. The same order further directs the petitioner in the meantime to enter into a personal bond and to furnish sureties for the same amount as interim measure that they shall maintain peace. It is needless to say that this order is made in case No. JM/mag/39/90 in proceedings drawn up under chapter VIII of the Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) THOUGH the order has been made against four persons, only three of them have come in the present petition challenging the same and it is the case of the petitioners that the first petitioner comes from a respectable and well-known family of Goa; that the petitioners No. 2 and 3 are employees of the first petitioner; that the first petitioner has been and continues to be an active worker of the Congress-I party, but ever since the Ministry of the Congress-I Government was toppled, from March, 1990, the petitioner No. 1 is harassed in many ways by the members/workers of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party which party has come in power by aligning itself with and forming the Progressive Democratic Front Ministry; that many of the workers/sympathisers of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party reside in the first petitioner property at Devsum in Pernem Taluka and they are seeking to prevent the first petitioners access to his own properties, for its improvement. It has been next averred that the first petitioner was recently perforced to file a Writ Petition (No. 119/90) against the Mamlatdar of Pernem, Taluka as also P. S. I. of Pernem Police Station for a mandamus restraining them from aiding the Sarpanch of the village Mandrem in the illegal construction of a road in the petitioners property known as Kharbawada, that on 15th July, 1990, when petitioners visited his property at Devsum for plucking coconut from his garden property though a person by name Nakul Mhamal was caught by them stealing coconuts from the property and though not a resident of the said village was being supported by one Raju Talaunekar who bears a long-standing grudge against the first petitioner. But even before the first petitioner could file the first Information Report it was discovered by the petitioners that the troubleshooters of the first petitioner had with the connivance of P. S. I. Lobo already registered a complaint against them as No. 49/90. It is against this background it is averred that the petitioners were served with the order of the Executive Magistrate of Pernem Taluka dated 1st August, 1990.