Rajendra vs State of U.P.

J.K. Mathur, J.—By this application u/s 482, Cr. P.C. the applicant seeks quashing of proceedings initiated against him u/s 107/116, Cr.P.C.

It is not disputed that proceedings u/s 107/106, Cr. P.C. are already pending against the present applicant on the basis of a report contained in annexure 1. During the pendency of these proceedings another set of proceedings are sought to be initiated against the applicant under the same provisions of law.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The purpose of proceedings u/s 107, Cr. P.C. is to require a person to keep peace during the period as may be fixed by the Magistrate extending to one year. In case of imminent breach of peace apprehended, the prosecution can always move u/s 116(3), Cr.P.C. during the enquiry. Another proceedings u/s 107, Cr. P.C. even if it succeeds will again result in same order as may be passed in the earlier proceeding. The order in the earlier proceedings will be effective against any breach of peace even if it is not connected with the incident in respect of which the proceedings are initiated.

In these circumstances, successive proceedings during the pendency of earlier ones, u/s 107/116, Cr. P.C. would only amount to harassment without any additional restriction imposable on the applicant. The process of law cannot be used merely to harass a person.

The application is, therefore, allowed. Only the proceedings u/s 107/116, Cr. P.C. as were initiated earlier against the petitioner are, therefore, to be continued. The subsequent set of proceedings are hereby quashed. However, it will be open to the Magistrate to proceed against the applicant after inclusion of the present proceedings, if it be necessary.