- (1.) A. S Tripathl, J. Heard learned Counsel for the revisionists and learned A. G. A. for State. Learned Magistrate has passed an order under Section 111, Cr. P. C. calling upon the revisionists to show-cause on the date fixed on 8- H-1993 or to furnish the bond of Rs. 25,000 and sureties of the same amount.
(2.) A perusal of the Section 111, Cr. P. C. shows that it is the duty of the Magistrate to proceed under the provisions of Sections 107, 108, 109 and 110, Cr. P. C. and enquire upon the information received, the Magistrate has to set forth the substance of the information and call upon the person concerned to show-cause as to why the amount of the bond to be executed the terms for which it is to be in force and the number, character and class of sureties, is specified. In this particular case the learned Magistrate has psssed this order on an information received from the S. H. O. Kydganj, Allahabad and calling upon the revisionists to show-cause as to why they could not be held to furnish the bonds required fixing 8- 11-1993. It has been averred in the affidavit that on the date fixed no action was taken by the Magistrate against the revisionists, who appear before the Court. When the revisionist appear before the Court for show-cause, the Magistrate did not proceed with the enquiry and even if the date is extended without hearing of the revisionist, the same is uncalled for as the provision of Section 111, Cr. P. C. are complete in itself. The provision of Sees. 113, 116 and 117 came into play when the person concerned are not present in the court or to fail to show-cause, the Magistrate call for furnishing the bonds under the provision under Section 116 (3), Cr. P. C. That stage has not come in this case. The date was fixed on 8- 11-1993 for appearance of the revisionists is the Court When the date was fixed on 8-11-1993 either to show-cause or to furnish tbe bonds and the revisionist appear, it was incumbent upon the learned Magistrate either to call upon to show-cause or to proceed with the enquiry. The revisionists when appeared the learned Magistrate did not do anything on that date. Accordingly the impugned order exhausted in same day. When nothing is done on the date fixed on the appearance of the revisionist and the learned Magistrate did not proceed with the enquiry further the said order exhausted. As such if the learned Magistrate wants to proceed in future fresh order is required in the circumstances. 5. With these observations the revision is disposed of finally. The learned Magistrate if deems necessary may proceed according to law by passing a fresh order. Revision disposed of. .;