Telangana High Court
CRLRC/3318/2015 of Guguloth Kalavathi Vs The State of Telangana on 30 December 2015
SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.3318 of 2015 ORDER: This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the notice, dated 14.12.2015, for forfeiture of bond for good behaviour in MC No.226/2015 dated 16.11.2015, issued by the Mandal Executive Magistrate,
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.
Arguments
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGOCRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.3318 of 2015
ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner aggrievedby the notice, dated 14.12.2015, for forfeiture of bond for goodbehaviour in MC No.226/2015 dated 16.11.2015, issued by theMandal Executive Magistrate, Konijerla, Khammam District.
It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner executed abond for good behavior for a period of six (6) months before theMandal Executive Magistrate on 16.11.2015 for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, invoking provisions under Section 110 Cr.P.C., vide proceedings inMC No.226/2015, dated 16.11.2015 in a case in COR No.517/2015-16, dated 16.11.2015. Subsequently, the petitioner was involved insimilar crime COR No.624/2015-16, dated 05.12.2015, during thependency of the bond. Therefore, the Executive Magistrate, Konijerla,has issued notice, dated 16.11.2015, requiring the petitioner to payRs.1,00,000/- as agreed upon by him or show cause as to why heshould not be adjudged for imprisonment until such bond periodexpires, within seven days from the date of service of the notice. Hence, the present revision is filed.
Heard and perused the material available on record.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitionernever executed any bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for good behaviorbefore the learned Magistrate and no proceedings were initiated underSection 110 Cr.P.C. and no order was passed under Section 111Cr.P.C., and no summons or warrants were issued requiring thepetitioner to appear as contemplated under Section 113 Cr.P.C. andno enquiry was conducted as to the truth or otherwise of theinformation received as contemplated under Section 116 Cr.P.C., and no final order was passed. He further submitted that the petitioner hasalready submitted reply, dated 18.12.2015, as per the directions issuedin the notice, dated 14.12.2015.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, theCriminal Revision Case is disposed of with the following direction:
“The order under revision is set aside and the authorityconcerned is directed to conduct an enquiry afresh. If it isfound in the enquiry that the petitioner committed anyoffence subsequent to the execution of the bond alleged tohave been executed by her, the authorities concerned are atliberty to pass appropriate orders. Till then, the respondent– police are directed not to arrest the petitioner. “
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shallstand closed.
______________
RAJA ELANGO, J
December 30, 2015.
KTL