Allahabad HC.: Nothing More Precious Than Personal Liberty And Reputation Of A Person

Factual Background

• An application under Sections 482, 378, and 407, I.P.C. was filed by one Noor Khan under Section 482 CrPC in the High Court.
• A notice under Section 111 Cr.P.C. was issued under the signature of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate.
• The Magistrate invoked Section 111 CrPC based on a single case involving Sections 323, 504, and 506 IPC. He had ordered the applicant to show cause as to why he was not directed to provide Rs 50,000 in sureties and a personal bond to keep the peace for the next three years.

Contentions from the Applicant

• The applicant's counsel argued that the proceedings are nothing more than an outright abuse of the legal system because the Magistrate appeared to be satisfied in invoking the provisions of Section 111 CrPC and ordering the applicant to show cause.
• It was argued that the notice issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate was a clear example of non-application of mind and that there was no material before the Magistrate that could have persuaded him to issue the process against the applicant. Also, he put forth that all proceedings pending before the Magistrate concerned are nothing more than an abuse of process.

Contentions from the Respondent

• According to the Additional Government Advocate, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate concerned has issued a notice and directed the applicant to appear before the Magistrate to file sureties and personal bond based on the report submitted by the concerned police station.
• As a result, it was stated that because it is a matter of law, order, and peace, the applicant could not have been adversely affected by it.

Court's Observation

• The Court stated that there could be no doubt that summoning a person by any criminal court for either purpose is a very serious matter. It is to be understood by all that there is nothing more valuable than a person's liberty and reputation.
• The Court further stated that when acting under Section 111 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate must be satisfied that an emergency exists. If so, he must record the reasons for notifying any accused person.
• A single case under Sections 323 (voluntary causing hurt), 504 (causing provocation), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the I.P.C. were filed against the applicant, as evident from the documents produced and the report, the Court noted.
• The Court stated that it is also unclear why the applicant's involvement in a private criminal dispute could disrupt public tranquility; therefore, in light of the facts and circumstances, the Court concluded that the instant case is an example of the Magistrate's complete lack of application of mind.

Court's Order

• A Single-judge bench led by Justice Mohd Faiz Alam Khan issued this order.
• The Allahabad High Court stayed the S.D.M.'s "strongly worded" notice, emphasising that "nothing is more valuable than a person's personal liberty and reputation."
• Further, after putting a stay on the notice, the Court fixed the next hearing on September 8, 2021.

What do you think about this case?