Telangana High Court
WP/42868/2015 of Anabothula Surya Prakash Rao S/o Ramachandraiah Vs The State of Telangana on 31 December 2015
SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.42868 of 2015 ORDER: The challenge in this writ petition is to the notice dated 30.11.2015 issued by the Executive Magistrate, Narsampet Mandal, Warangal District, the fourth respondent. By the said notice, the fourth respondent exercised powers
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.42868 of 2015
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The challenge in this writ petition is to the notice dated30.11.2015 issued by the Executive Magistrate, Narsampet Mandal,Warangal District, the fourth respondent. By the said notice, the fourthrespondent exercised powers under Section 122(b) Cr.P.C. andordered the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. This paymentwas directed in the context of the petitioner being bound over for goodbehaviour on 29.09.2015 for a like sum.
2. The impugned notice reflects that after being bound over, thepetitioner was implicated in COR Nos.1001/2015-16 dated 25.11.2015in relation to an offence under Section 34(e) of A.P.Excise Act, 1968.Owing to the alleged involvement of the petitioner in the said offence,the fourth respondent concluded that the petitioner committed breachof the bond furnished by him under Section 110 Cr.P.C.
3. Having received instructions in the matter, the learned AssistantGovernment Pleader for Excise conceded that no enquiry wasconducted under Section 117 Cr.P.C. before exercise of powers underSection 122 Cr.P.C. That apart, this Court is of the opinion that merearraignment in an offence cannot be taken to be a conviction wherebyit could be said that the petitioner had committed a breach of the bondfurnished by him for maintaining good behaviour.
4. Thus, on counts more than one, the impugned notice dated30.11.2015 is unsustainable and is therefore set aside.
The writ petition is allowed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, ifany, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as tocosts.
December 31, 2015Note:-Furnish copy today.{B/o} LMV
____________________
JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR