Badri Prasad and ors. Vs. the State

Badri Prasad and ors. vs The State

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jan 04, 1954

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/468520

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/468520
Court: Allahabad High Court
Judge: Kidwai, J.
Decided On: Jan 04, 1954
Case Number: Criminal Misc. No. 335 of 1953
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal - objectionable matter - Sections 117, 107 and 561A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 - a proceeding against applicants under Sections 107 and 117 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 - no justified conclusion - proof of no apprehension of breach of peace from them - opportunity not given - abuse of process of C...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 107, 117 and 561A

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Badri Prasad and ors.

Advocate R.K. Rai, Adv.

Respondent

The State

Advocate Govt. Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 107, 117 and 561A
Reported In: AIR1954All591

Excerpt

criminal - objectionable matter - sections 117, 107 and 561a of criminal procedure code, 1898 - a proceeding against applicants under sections 107 and 117 of criminal procedure code, 1898 - no justified conclusion - proof of no apprehension of breach of peace from them - opportunity not given - abuse of process of court and against the principles of natural justice. - - i accordingly direct that the later portion of the order shall be deemed to be non-existent though i cannot order the removal of the words complained of from the order itself which is a part of the record of the court......thereafter a report was made by the police that there was no longer any apprehension of a breach of the peace. the learned city magistrate then passed the order in question. 3. it appears from a perusal of the order that without going into the matter at all the learned magistrate was inclined to the view that at one time there had in fact been an occasion for a proper report under sections 107 and 117, criminal p. c. he had no justification whatsoever for arriving at any such conclusion without allowing an opportunity to the applicants to show that at no time was there any apprehension of a breach of the peace from them. when he was finally withdrawing the notice, he had no business to issue any warning. he had no reason to anticipate that the accused would give legitimate occasion for a report against them.4. it is always up to the police to make any report that it likes and it is for the magistrate to judge the validity of any such report and not merely to place the accused persons at the mercy of the police surely as is done by the last sentence of this order since the police is directed to take immediate action should an occasion arisewhen the police may have any complaint. the police have large powers under the law. they can always take action that the law justifies but there is no justification for the magistrate, who is not a police officer and who should be as interested in safeguarding the interest of innocent persons accused of the crime as he should be in the prevention of the crime, to go out of his way to issue such warnings. such a course of action is wholly unjustified under the law and can be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. i accordingly direct that the later portion of the order shall be deemed to be non-existent though i cannot order the removal of the words complained of from the order itself which is a part of the record of the court.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Kidwai, J.

1. This is an application under Section 561A, Criminal P. C. for expunging certain remarks contained in the judgment of the City Magistrate of Lucknow. A proceeding was going on against the applicants under Sections 107/117, Criminal P. C. On 15th May 1953 the learned City Magistrate passed the following order :

'As per S. O.'s report and the A. P. P. endorsement thereon of 15-5-1953 suggesting that there is no apprehension of breach of the peace now, the case is filed and the notices withdrawn with a warning to the accused that they shall not give any chance to the police to report danger to breach of the peace at any time in future. Should such an occasion, however, arise the S. O. shall take immediate N. A. Copy to S. O'.

2. It appears from a perusal of this order that an apprehension at one time existed of a breach of the peace and proceedings were, therefore, started under Sections 107/117. These proceedings continued for some time and written statements were filed on behalf of the accused persons. Thereafter a report was made by the police that there was no longer any apprehension of a breach of the peace. The learned City Magistrate then passed the order in question.

3. It appears from a perusal of the order that without going into the matter at all the learned Magistrate was inclined to the view that at one time there had in fact been an occasion for a proper report under Sections 107 and 117, Criminal P. C. He had no justification whatsoever for arriving at any such conclusion without allowing an opportunity to the applicants to show that at no time was there any apprehension of a breach of the peace from them. When he was finally withdrawing the notice, he had no business to issue any warning. He had no reason to anticipate that the accused would give legitimate occasion for a report against them.

4. It is always up to the police to make any report that it likes and it is for the Magistrate to judge the validity of any such report and not merely to place the accused persons at the mercy of the police surely as is done by the last sentence of this order since the police is directed to take immediate action should an occasion arisewhen the police may have any complaint. The police have large powers under the law. They can always take action that the law justifies but there is no justification for the Magistrate, who is not a police officer and who should be as interested in safeguarding the interest of innocent persons accused of the crime as he should be in the prevention of the crime, to go out of his way to issue such warnings.

Such a course of action is wholly unjustified under the law and can be nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court. I accordingly direct that the later portion of the order shall be deemed to be non-existent though I cannot order the removal of the words complained of from the order itself which is a part of the record of the Court.

Same Parties Badri Prasad and ors. vs The State Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Kidwai, J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 107, 117 ...

Criminal