File photograph used for representational purposes only
The Madras High Court on Monday held as unconstitutional two Government Orders (GOs) issued in 2013 and 2014 that empowered Deputy Commissioners of Police to exercise the powers of executive magistrates under sections 107 to 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). . For the purpose of executing bonds from habitual offenders to keep the peace and maintain good behaviour.
Disposing of a large batch of petitions challenging orders passed by Deputy Commissioners of Police, Justice N. Satish Kumar and Justice N. A special bench headed by Justice Anand Venkatesh said that the mandates issued on September 12, 2013 and February 20, 2014 “suffer from manifest arbitrariness and violate the principle of separation of powers under the Constitution.”
In addition, the mandate violated Articles 14 (equality before law) and 50 (separation of judiciary and executive) of the Constitution, as well as Section 6 of the Madras District Police (no police officer to exercise judicial or revenue authority). violated the provisions of Acts of 1859, the Bench declared them unconstitutional and ultra vires Legal provision.
The Court ordered status quo, as it was before issuing the two mandates, and assumed that such a status quo would be restored immediately. The Bench also clarified that a bond executed under Section 110 of the CrPC can be violated only by Judicial Magistrates under Section 446 and not by Executive Magistrates under Section 122(1)(b) of the Code.
“An Executive Magistrate cannot authorize imprisonment under section 122(1)(b) of the Code for breach of bond under section 107. A person who has committed a breach of a bond executed before an Executive Magistrate under the said provision shall be tried before a Judicial Magistrate for investigation and punishment under Section 122(1)(b) of the CrPC,” the judgment read.
In a preface to their detailed judgment on a huge batch of cases argued together for days by a battery of lawyers, the judges wrote: “Once upon a time under the umbrella of justice sat judicial magistrates who exercised preventive jurisdiction under the Criminal Code. process to ensure that law and order is maintained in the areas under its jurisdiction.”
However, “docket explosion in regular courts, delays and other allied reasons necessitated a statutory transfer of this canopy to an executive magistrate, a revenue officer, who exercised jurisdiction over information supplied by the police. The canopy was also resting comfortably over the head of the revenue officer.
“Like the proverbial camel in a tent the police occasionally poke their nose into the canopy but are stopped on the tracks by the courts. Then, in 2013, the camel completely turned on itself and the Revenue Officer, Executive Magistrate was thrown out of the canopy and left out in the cold….”
Judges Appreciate Her amicus curiae Sarath Chandran, Additional Public Prosecutor and Janardhan, advocates Vivekanandan and M.Santhanaraman have assisted the court in curing an illegality which has been going on for the last 10 years affecting the personal liberty of individuals.