Skip to content


Gurusawmi Nadan and ors. Vs. Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in13Ind.Cas.831
AppellantGurusawmi Nadan and ors.
RespondentEmperor
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 107 - security for breach of peace--vague apprehension--order--duties of the magistrate--lawful exercise of right--unlawful opposition. - .....to carry palkis in procession. all that is alleged against them is that they are leading men of their community. supposing that some of the nadars or the accused themselves wanted this year to take palanquins in procession through public streets, they would have every right to do s3, and if any person wanted unlawfully to oppose them in the exercise of such right, they ought to be bound down, and not persons who were lawfully exercising or wanted to exercise their ordinary right. it is the duty of the sub-divisional officer who is responsible for the peace of his division to use his authority for the protection of persons who seek to exercise a right which the law allows them, and to restrain persons who threaten to obstruct the exercise of such right, and for this purpose to enforce,.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Abdur Rahim, J.

1. There is absolutely no warrant for the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. There is no evidence to show that the accused were likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity or to do any act which would probably occasion a breach of the peace. All that is found is that on a previous occasion, about a year ago, the Nadars asserted their right to carry palkis through the public street on occasions of marriage, and there was a breach of the peace, as some people in the village opposed the Nadars taking palkis in procession on the ground apparently of the Nadirs' caste, which, in their opponents' estimation, is not high enough to justify otieir using palkia during marriage. Nothing particular happened at the time the present proceedings were instituted, except that the marriage session was fast approaching and the Police and the Sub-Divisional Sub-Magistrate were apprehensive that, if the Nadars insisted on their right as before and other party opposed them, there might be a disturbance. It is not even shown that the accused bad any marriages to celebrate in their family, and that they were preparing to carry palkis in procession. All that is alleged against them is that they are leading men of their community. Supposing that some of the Nadars or the accused themselves wanted this year to take palanquins in procession through public streets, they would have every right to do S3, and if any person wanted unlawfully to oppose them in the exercise of such right, they ought to be bound down, and not persons who were lawfully exercising or wanted to exercise their ordinary right. It is the duty of the Sub-Divisional Officer who is responsible for the peace of his Division to use his authority for the protection of persons who seek to exercise a right which the law allows them, and to restrain persons who threaten to obstruct the exercise of such right, and for this purpose to enforce, if necessary, the provisions of Section 107, Criminal Procedure Code, not against the former but against the latter. I set aside the order under Section 107, Criminal Procedure Code, and the bonds executed by the accused will be discharged.


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