Skip to content


Kunju Kunju Asari Nanu Asari Vs. Sanku Asari Thankappan Asari and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtKerala High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in1954CriLJ211
AppellantKunju Kunju Asari Nanu Asari
RespondentSanku Asari Thankappan Asari and ors.
Excerpt:
- - the magistrate has to be satisfied that it is not proved that there are justifiable grounds for ordering the counter-petitioners to execute bonds to keep the peace and if so he has to record that fact and on the basis of that finding, he can pass an order discharging the counter-petitioners......before the lower court at whose instance security proceedings were initiated against the counter-petitioners has filed this petition seeking a revision of the order passed by the magistrate discharging the counter-petitioners. even though the lower court's order purports to have been passed under section 119, criminal p. c., it is seen that the magistrate has not exercised the jurisdiction vested in him under that section. he has. discharged the counter-petitioner for the sole reason that p. w. 1 was absent when the case was taken up on two occasions.2. in the nature of the proceedings, the magistrate could not drop them or dismiss the same for the mere default of the complainant. the magistrate has to be satisfied that it is not proved that there are justifiable grounds for.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Sankaran, J.

1. The petitioner before the lower Court at whose instance security proceedings were initiated against the counter-petitioners has filed this petition seeking a revision of the order passed by the Magistrate discharging the counter-petitioners. Even though the lower Court's order purports to have been passed under Section 119, Criminal P. C., it is seen that the Magistrate has not exercised the jurisdiction vested in him under that section. He has. discharged the counter-petitioner for the sole reason that P. W. 1 was absent when the case was taken up on two occasions.

2. In the nature of the proceedings, the Magistrate could not drop them or dismiss the same for the mere default of the complainant. The Magistrate has to be satisfied that it is not proved that there are justifiable grounds for ordering the counter-petitioners to execute bonds to keep the peace and if so he has to record that fact and on the basis of that finding, he can pass an order discharging the counter-petitioners. The order of the Magistrate does not show that he had directed his mind to this aspect as required by Section 119. Hence the order as it stands cannot be sustained. This Revision Petition is, therefore allowed and the order of the lower Court is set aside and the case sent back to that Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //