KOPPALA SUNKI REDDY Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings in M.C. No.B/5/2002, dated 3-4-2002, on the file of the Revenue Divisional Officer and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ananthapur.

(2.) Bating on the information given by the Inspecto of Police, Ananthapur Rural Circle, the 2nd respondent issued a notice to 'A' party, i.e., petitioners herein, to appear before him on 29-4-2002 to show cause as to why they should not be bounded over for the period he deemed fit. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the impugned order does not specify the amount of the bond to be executed, and the term for which it was to be in force, the number, character and class of sureties required to be furnished. Therefore, the petition has to be allowed. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor contended that the impugned order contained the substances of the information received from the Inspector-of Police and therefore there is no violation of the procedure prescribed under Section 111 Cr.P.C.

(3.) There cannot be any dispute that an Executive Magistrate acting under Secs. 107 to 111 Cr.P.C. shall make an order in writing setting forth the substance of the information received, the amount of bond to be executed, the term for which it has to be in force, and the number, character and class of sureties required to be furnished. As seen from the impugned order, except the substance of the information, it does not contain the other details. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed.