(1.) THE Petitioner challenges the show cause notice purportedly issued under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Special Executive Magistrate, Bandra Division, Mumbai. Though normally, the writ petition will not lie for challenging the show cause notice, I find that the show cause notice glaringly absent the basic ingredients to issue show cause notice against the Petitioner. THE show cause notice reveals that on 18.. 1998 (sic) in the morning at 8.45 a. m. the Petitioner had arrived at Shanti Enterprises, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai 400 056 and opened the office and entered the same along with his employer. At that place after some time the associates of the Petitioner by name (1) Imran Unus Taiwani, (2) Hassain A. Rauf Shaikh and (3) Mustakh Shaikh entered the said office and with the consent of the petitioner they ran away with Rs. 2,00,000/- in possession of his employer Shri. Kamalchand Pokharaj Golecha by injuring him with a cricket bat and by threatening with a knife, in a motor car bearing No. MH 02 L 7329. THE Police has registered crime No. 339 of 1998 under Ss. 394,397 read with 34 of I. P. C. and it is only in this back ground on which Chapter proceedings has been initiated against the Petitioner. Surprisingly, no averment is contained in the Notice that the Petitioner was responsible for the breach of peace and tranquility of the area and that unless he was proceeded against under chapter proceedings the peace cannot be restored in the society. In the absence of sufficient material show cause notice is held to be illegal.
(2.) IN the result, Writ Petition is allowed. The order impugned is set aside. Rule is made absolute in terms of Prayer Clause (a ). No order as to costs. Petition allowed. .