MAZID Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the Addi. Distt. Magistrate I, Jaipur, vide his notice u/Section 111, Cr. P.C. dated 5-8-1993 required the presence of the petitioner before him on 2-9-1993 to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/ -, with one surety in the like amount, for his good behaviour for a period of one year. The petitioner challenged the issuance of the notice dated 5-8-1993 to him before the learned Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur, by preferring a revision application u/Section 397, Cr. P.C. The learned Sessions-Judge, however, declined to entertain the application on the ground that as simply a notice u/Section 111, Cr. P.C. had been issued to the petitioner he may raise his objection against the notice before the learned Magistrate. The order so made by the learned Sessions Judge on 7-2-1994 has been challenged by the petitioner through this petition u/Section 482, Cr. P.C.

(2.) I heard the learned Counsel for the parties and examined the record of the lower Courts.

(3.) Relying on the decision of this Court in the case of Ramesh Chandra Soni v. State of Rajasthan, Mr. R.N. Sharma, the learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that proceedings u/Section 110, Cr. P.C. cannot be instituted against the petitioner simply on the ground, that he was a man of quarrelsome nature and two or three cases, involving alleged use of violence or criminal force by him against others, were instituted.