ASHIM KUMAR ROY, J. - (1.) SINCE in all these three criminal revisional applications a common question of law arises for decision and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners is same. These criminal revisional applications are taken up for hearing together and are disposed of by this common order.
(2.) THE subject matter of challenge in the aforesaid three criminal revisions are the orders passed in connection with a proceeding under Section 108 of the Code of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The aforesaid three proceedings were instituted on police report and the orders were passed by the same court. The only point canvassed before this court was this in the aforesaid three matters, the petitioners were directed to execute bond for keeping good behaviour on the ground they were disseminating seditious matter, however without giving them the opportunity to file show cause. Accordingly, it is submitted the impugned orders are not lawful. On the other hand, Mr. Amarta Ghose, the learned Junior Government Advocate appearing for the State, in his usual fairness submitted that issuing of show cause notice is obligatory and, therefore, without first issuing of show cause notice, the learned court concerned cannot make such order directing any person to execute the bond. Now, having regard to the provisions of section 108 Cr.P.C., an Executive Magistrate if satisfied from the information received that any person within his jurisdiction disseminating seditious matter intentionally or attempting or abetting the same and is of the opinion there is sufficient ground for proceeding, the learned Magistrate is first required to issue show cause calling upon the person concerned to explain why he shall not be ordered to execute a bond with or without sureties for his good behaviour for any particular period. The provisions of section 111 Cr.P.C. prescribed what are the legal formalities to be followed in making such order. Similarly, the provisions of Section 116 Cr.P.C. provides if the person required to show cause disputed the allegations an enquiry has to be commenced to determine the truth of such information and the procedure to be followed in this regard. Therefore, from the aforesaid provisions it is abundantly clear that before making any final order in terms of the provisions of Section 108 Cr.P.C. it is incumbent upon the learned Executive Magistrate to give the person concerned sufficient opportunity to show cause for defending him. Not only issuance of show cause notice is mandatory, the principle of natural justice demands that before making any order adversely affecting any person, the person concerned must be given reasonable opportunity to have his say.
(3.) NOW , having regard to the orders impugned, one was passed on 11th October, 2013 in connection with M. Case No.364 of 2013, the next one on 11th October, 2013 in connection with M.Case No.366 of 2013 and the last one on 11th October, 2013 in connection with M.Case No.365 of 2013. I find not only the same were in utter infringement of the provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the same is also in complete derogation of the principle of natural justice. The learned Magistrate without issuing show cause at the first blast directed the petitioners to execute the bond, which is patently illegal and without jurisdiction.;