Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1905 DIGILAW 91 (ALL)

In The Matter of The Petition of Chet Ram v. .

1905-04-27

AIKMAN

body1905
JUDGMENT : Aikman, J. By an order passed under section 118 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the applicants were directed to execute a bond with sureties for keeping the peace, The order was passed by a Magistrate of the first class. Against this order they presented an appeal to the learned District Magistrate, by whom it was dismissed on the 2nd of January last. The applicants apply to this Court to interfere in revision on the ground that no notice was given to them or their pleader of the date fixed for the hearing of the appeal. In support of this application an affidavit is filed by one Jirag, who had also been ordered by the Magistrate to furnish security for keeping the peace. In my opinion this affidavit is worthless. I find on the learned District Magistrate's record an order passed by him upon an application for re-hearing of the appeal, in which order it is stated that the applicant's pleader was informed of the date fixed for the hearing of the appeal. No affidavit by the pleader is filed. Apart from tin's, there Is another reason why I should decline to interfere. 2. It is this. Section 118 of the Code of Criminal Procedure authorises a Magistrate to make an order in cases in which “it is, in his opinion, proved to be necessary for keeping the peace or maintaining good behaviour.” Now, although section 406 does give a right of appeal to the District Magistrate from an order to give security for good behaviour, nowhere in the Code is any right of appeal given from an order to give security for keeping the peace. Section 404 of the Code provider that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court, except as provided by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force. From the language of his judgment in this and in the connected case which is before me, it appears that the learned District Magistrate is under the impression that an appeal does lie to him from orders for giving security to keep the peace. But this is a mistake. The applicants had no right of appeal, and no right to be heard at all. For the above reasons I dismiss this application.