VASANTKUMAR JIVRAMBHAI MAJITHIA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. The learned A. P. P. waives service for the Respondent No. 1. Service on Respondent No. 2 is dispensed with. Taken up for hearing forthwith. I have heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Associate Advocate General for the state.

(2.) The challenge in this petition under article 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Code") is to the show cause notice dated 26th April, 2005 issued by the Special Executive magistrate, Mulund Division, Mulund, under section 111 of the said Code.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the notice under section 111 of the said Code is contrary to law. He pointed out that the notice recites that there was a dispute between the Petitioner and the witness No. 1 over the business of cable network business. It is alleged that the petitioner hurled abuses at the witness No. 1 and therefore, a N. C. complaint has been registered against the Petitioner for commission of offence under sections 323 and 504 of the indian Penal Code. It is alleged that on 26th april, 2005 at about 9.45 a. m. the Petitioner threatened the witness No. 1 and warned him to withdraw the N. C. complaint by warning him that in Mumbai number of accidents take place. By the said show-cause notice, the petitioner was called upon to show-cause as to why he should not be directed to furnish a bond for good behaviour for one year with one surety in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- of a respectable person. The Petitioner was called upon to remain present on 10th May, 2005 in the office of the Special Executive Magistrate. It is alleged that on 10th May, 2005, when the petitioner met Assistant Police Inspector Shri. Rapade, who asked the Petitioner whether he was willing to settle the dispute by paying cash or whether he was willing to provide a cable line connection. It is alleged that it is the said shri. Rapade who served show cause notice on the Petitioner. On 10th May, 2005, the petitioner narrated all this to the Assistant commissioner of Police, under whose signature the notice was issued. Thereafter API Shri. Rapade and a Constable Shri. Sapkal started demanding money for themselves. On the next date fixed i. e. on 14th June, 2005, the Petitioner attended the office of the Special Executive magistrate along with his Advocate. His advocate submitted an application on that day with a prayer to furnish copies of the complaint lodged with the Police Station to enable the petitioner to submit a reply. An adjournment was sought for a period of one month. The allegation in the petition is that the Application made by the Advocate was not accepted and the Petitioner was forced to execute a bond.