Vadthavath Hernia Naik v. The State Of Telangana, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.11037 of 2016 ORDER:

The challenge in this writ petition is to the notice dated 30.03.2016 issued by the Executive Magistrate-cum-Tahsildar, Addakal Mandal, the third respondent. By the said notice, the third respondent exercised powers under Section 122(b) Cr.P.C. and ordered the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. This payment was directed in the context of the petitioner being bound over for good behaviour on 25.01.2016 for a like sum.

The impugned notice reflects that after being bound over, the petitioner was implicated in an offence under Section 7(A) read with Section 8(e) of the Prohibition Act, 1995. Owing to the alleged involvement of the petitioner in the said offence, the third respondent concluded that the petitioner committed breach of the bond furnished by him under Section 110 Cr.P.C.

This Court is of the opinion that mere arraignment in an offence cannot be taken to be a conviction whereby it could be said that the petitioner had committed a breach of the bond furnished by him for maintaining good behaviour.

Thus, on this count, the impugned notice dated 30.03.2016 is unsustainable and is therefore set aside.

The writ petition is allowed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs.

____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 4th April, 2016 Note:- Issue CC today.

(B/o)IBL