Madras HC Reiterates The 10-Pointer Procedure To Be Followed By The Executive Magistrate While Enquiring
🔷 Madras High Court Reiterates the 10-Pointer Procedure for Executive Magistrates While Enquiring Under CrPC
🔹 Background:
Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) deals with “Security for Keeping the Peace and for Good Behaviour”.
Sections 107 to 110 CrPC empower the Executive Magistrate to take preventive action when there is an apprehension of breach of peace or public tranquility.
However, the procedure must comply with constitutional safeguards and natural justice.
The Madras High Court has laid down a structured 10-point guideline to ensure that these powers are not exercised arbitrarily.
🔟 Ten-Point Procedure to be Followed by Executive Magistrates:
1. Satisfaction Based on Police Report
The Executive Magistrate must form an opinion based on a report (usually from the police) that there is a genuine apprehension of breach of peace or disturbance of public order.
2. Issuance of a Show-Cause Notice
The Magistrate must issue a clear and detailed notice under Section 111 CrPC to the person concerned, asking them to show cause why they should not be bound over for good behaviour.
3. Mention of Specific Grounds
The notice must mention the specific grounds and facts leading to the proceedings. Vague or general statements are insufficient and illegal.
4. Recording of Reasons
The Magistrate must record reasons for initiating the inquiry. These should not be a mere formality — the order must reflect application of mind.
5. Personal Appearance of the Respondent
The person against whom the proceedings are initiated must be given a fair opportunity to appear, either in person or through counsel.
6. Right to Cross-Examination
The person has a right to cross-examine the witnesses or challenge the evidence presented. This is a quasi-judicial proceeding, and fair trial principles apply.
7. Conducting an Enquiry
A proper enquiry under Section 116 CrPC must be conducted. The Magistrate must collect evidence, examine witnesses, and only then come to a conclusion.
8. Passing a Speaking Order
The final order must be a “speaking order”, meaning it must disclose the reasoning and evidence considered while passing the bond order.
9. Limitation Period for Bond
The bond to be taken must comply with the limitation laid under the CrPC — maximum one year under Section 107, and maximum three years under Section 110.
10. No Mechanical or Routine Orders
The entire process must be free from mechanical exercise of power. Any order passed without proper enquiry, notice, or application of mind is liable to be quashed by the High Court.
🔹 Key Legal Reasoning by the Madras High Court:
Preventive proceedings are not punitive in nature, but meant to avert possible threats to peace and order.
However, misuse of these powers has been noticed — particularly when used to harass individuals or settle scores.
The Court emphasized that Executive Magistrates act as quasi-judicial officers and not mere administrative agents.
🔹 Case Law Principles (General and Binding):
Section 111 CrPC requires detailed notice – vague references or templated formats are invalid.
Enquiry under Section 116 is mandatory, and its omission vitiates the entire proceeding.
Supreme Court and multiple High Courts have struck down proceedings initiated without application of mind or evidence.
🔹 Key Objectives Behind These Guidelines:
Objective | Explanation |
---|---|
✅ Prevent misuse of preventive powers | Ensures protection of liberty and prevents arbitrary action |
✅ Ensure natural justice | Guarantees fair hearing and reasoning |
✅ Promote judicial accountability | Prevents routine, mechanical or copied orders |
✅ Strengthen rule of law | Ensures power is used only where genuinely needed |
🔹 Conclusion:
The Madras High Court's 10-point directive serves as a comprehensive procedural safeguard against misuse of preventive detention-like powers under Sections 107 to 110 CrPC. Executive Magistrates must act judiciously, transparently, and fairly when invoking these powers. Any deviation may render their orders vulnerable to being set aside as illegal or unconstitutional.
0 comments