S. S. BYAS, J. - (1.) BY this application under section 482, Cr. P. C. the petitioner challenges the correctness of the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Executive), Jodhpur City dated September 24, 1982 and prays for quashing the proceeding initiated against him under section 110, Cr. P. C.
(2.) BRIEFLY recounted, the relevant facts are that the Station House Officer, Police Station, Sadar Bazar, Jodhpur submitted a report in writing before the Magistrate for initiating an inquiry under section 110, Cr. P. C. against the petitioner Ramesh Chandra. It was stated in the report that Ramesh Chandra is a man of quarrel-some nature and picks-up quarrels here and there. The citizens are afraid-of in lodging reports to the police against his criminal activities. On March 8, 1982, a case under sections 341 and 323/34, I. P. C. and another case under sections 147, 148, 149, 342, 332, 353, 307 and 393, I. P. C. were registered against him at police station, Sadar Bazar, Jodhpur. It was prayed that he be directed to execute bonds for his good behaviour. The police arrested the petitioner and presented him with the aforesaid report before the Magistrate on September 24, 1982. The learned Magistrate directed him to execute bonds for putting personal appearance on every date of hearing. On October 14, 1982, a preliminary order was drawn by the Magistrate and a notice was issued to the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be directed to execute a personal bond in the amount of Rs. 5000/- together with a surety in the like amount to be of good behaviour for a period of one year. The petitioner challenged the validity of the order passed on September 24, 1982. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. It was contended by Mr. Jasmatia that the Executive Magistrate gots jurisdiction under section 110, Cr. P. C. only when he receives information against a person of the nature mentioned in the said section. Unless the information fails within any of the clauses of section 110, Cr. P. C. , no proceeding can be initiated under it. In the report filed by the police, no information of the nature specified in section 110, Cr. P. C. was mentioned. Reliance in support of the contention was placed on Gopalnchari Vs. State of Kerala (1 ). It was, on the other hand, contended by the learned Public Prosecutor that the information furnished by police was sufficient to initiate a proceeding under section 110, Cr. P. C. against Ramesh Chandra. I have taken the respective submissions into consideration. Section 110, Cr. P. C. empowers the Executive Magistrate to initiate a proceeding under it against a person only when he receives information of the nature specified therein. Clauses (a) to (g) of this section contain the nature of information on which a proceeding u/s 110, Cr. P. C. is to be initiated. Unfortunately, in the report filed by the Station House Officer, the facts disclosed do not fall within any of the clauses (a) to (g) of section 110, Cr. P. C. What has been mentioned in the police report is that Ramesh Chandra is a man of quarrel-some nature and picks-up quarrels here and there. Simply because a citizen happens to be a man of quarrel-some nature and picks-up quarrels off and on, proceeding under section 110, Cr. P. C. cannot be initiated against him. Section 110, Cr. P. C does not contain the provision that it can be applied to a person who is of quarrel-some nature and picks-up quarrels. In the police report, only two cases-one registered in February, 1982 and the other registered in July, 1982, have been mentioned. From the registration of these two cases, it cannot be said that Ramesh Chandra is so desperate and dangerous as to render him being at large without security is hazardous to the community. A proceeding under section 110, Cr. P. C. interferes with the liberty of a citizen. The powers under section 110, Cr. P. C. are not meant for restricting the liberty of a citizen. The information furnished by the police to the Executive Magistrate is not sufficient to initiate a proceeding under Section 110, Cr. P. C. against the petitioner Ramesh Chandra.
(3.) IN the result, the petition is allowed and the impugned order dated September 24, 1982 is set-aside. The proceedings initiated under section 110, Cr. P. C. against Ramesh Chandra, taken in pursuance to the order dated September 24, 1982, will stand quashed. .;