ABDUL HAMID Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Rule calling upon the District Magistrate of Mymensingh to show cause why an order calling upon the petitioners to execute bonds to be of good behaviour should not be set aside. Proceedings were drawn up against the first two petitioners and four others on a police report on 17-7-1943. Similar proceedings were drawn up against the third petitioner and one other much later on 11-12-1943. For reasons that are not at all apparent these two proceedings were tried together and one of the complaints made by the petitioners is that they have been prejudiced thereby.

(2.) The proceedings were drawn up on the usual lines and alleged that the petitioners were by habit thieves, robbers and burglars and men of so desperate and dangerous a character, that their being at large without security was hazardous to the community. The evidence was led on the usual lines and it is a matter of common experience that in these cases the last allegation is nothing but padding.

(3.) The prosecution miserably failed to establish the main part of their case and the Magistrate was not satisfied that the petitioners were habitual thieves, robbers or burglars. He made an order against them, however, on the ground that they are of dangerous and desparate character.