CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(2002) 01 PAT CK 0124

Kumari Richa vs State of Bihar and Others

Patna High Court · Decided on 2 January 2002 · Citation: (2002) 1 PLJR 400

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.N. Prasad, J · B.N.P. Singh, J
CASE NUMBER
Cr.W.J.C. No. 539 of 2001

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 384 words
1.

The Petitioner moved this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order, annexure 1 whereby the husband of the Petitioner was taken into custody in a proceeding u/s 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The contention of the Petitioner was that pursuant to the notice her husband appeared before the authority concerned and denied the allegation made against him. However, order was passed to execute bond for maintaining the peace which was not done and as such he was taken into custody. This Court on 3.12.2001 directed for release of the husband of the Petitioner on the ground that necessary reason for taking the husband of the Petitioner into custody was not mentioned in the order sheet.

2.

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondents wherein it has been stated that the Petitioner''s husband without permission of the authority concerned was filling up the land of the Court premises for which a proceeding u/s 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was initiated. He appeared on the date fixed but did not file any show cause. The petition was filed for passing an order u/s 116 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the basis of which the order was passed and the Petitioner''s husband was taken into custody. The order sheet has been annexed wherefrom it does not appear that anything has been mentioned to show that unless the Petitioner''s husband is taken into custody, apprehension of breach of peace cannot be avoided. Such reason is necessary for passing the order u/s 116 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for taking the proceede into custody but no such reason has been mentioned and as such the order taking into custody vide annexure 1 appears to be bad in law and as such the order annexure 1 is quashed. However the proceeding u/s 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would continue.

3.

It is made clear that in case of breach of peace at the hand of the Petitioner''s husband, the party shall be at liberty to file application for passing order u/s 116 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the authority concerned shall be at liberty to pass order in accordance with law.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.