AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Subhash Chandra Nigam, J.—Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This criminal revision has been directed against the order dated 23.03.2010 passed by Pargana Magistrate, Nawabganj, district Bareilly in Case No. 892 of 2010, under Sections 107/116 Cr.P.C., Village Harharpur Matkali, P.S. Hafizganj, District Bareilly by which the bonds executed by the revisionits have been forfeited and the proceedings for their realization have been initiated against the revisionists.
The brief facts giving rise to this criminal revision are that the revisionists were directed to execute a personal bond of Rs.25, 000/ for keeping these vide order passed in Case No. 892 of 2010. S.O. Hafizganj, District Bareilly submitted a report on 29.12.2009 alleging therein that the revisionists have again created law and order problem and in this connection, the criminal case bearing Case Crime No. 809 of 2009, under Sections 147, 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. has been registered. S.O. Hafizganj had requested that since the revisionists have committed breach of peace, the personal bonds executed by them may be forfeited.
It is being submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists that the criminal case bearing Case Crime No. 809 of 2009, under Sections 147, 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. is still pending and until they are held guilty, it cannot be said that the revisionists have committed breach of peace. Further submission is that the false case has been registered against them.
I find force in the submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionists in this regard.
The revisionists cannot be held guilty for breaching of peace unless and until the criminal case bearing Case Crime No. 809 of 2009, under Sections 147, 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. results in their conviction and hence, the order dated 23.3.2010 is premature and is liable to be quashed.
In the end, this criminal revision is allowed. The order dated 23.3.2010 is quashed.
However, learned Pargana Magistrate concerned would be free to pass an appropriate order after the decision of the criminal case bearing Case Crime No. 809 of 2009.