DR. MAHABIR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Bishwanath Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri K.K. Jha 'Kamal' Addl. P. P. appearing on behalf of the State.

(2.) The facts of the case are not disputed on behalf of the State. It reveals a very sorry state of affairs, and it is unfortunate that such things happen notwithstanding the freedom and liberty guaranteed to a citizen under the Constitution of India. The learned counsel for the State has also conceded that he is not in a position to justify the proceeding and the order passed, but argues that in such a case, the aggrieved party should be directed to seek his remedy before the learned Sessions Judge. This is a gross case, and I do not think that the interest of justice requires that the party should be sent to the Sessions Judge, when the High Court has abundant power under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to do justice and quash the proceeding.

(3.) It is surprising that for merely publishing a leaflet in support of an important personality, who according to the petitioner was harassed by the local administration, the instant proceeding under Sec. 107 of the Code was intitated against the petitioner on 74-7-1987. I find nothing in the leaflet Published which may justify the initiation of proceeding under Sec. 107 of the Code, nor did the learned Addl. P. P. appearing for the State find any. The petitioner was required to furnish a bond of Rs. 5,000.00 with two sureties of the like amount each. On the pretext of verifying the sureties furnished, the petitioner was kept in custody for one day. On the following day, in view of the treatment meted out to him, the petitioner managed to provide cash security and was thereafter released on a cash security of Rs. 10,000.00. The least that can be said is that the learned Magistrate has acted in manner under which does no credit to an officer exercising authority under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Anxiety to please official superiors is not a quality of a person exercising authority under a statute, judicial in character. While exercising powers under a law, the concerned authority does not function as a Government Servant, nor is he required to take directions from those above him in the official heirarchy. He must act as a servant of the statute and must exercise his powers within the four corners of the statute which gives him the power which he exercised. Needless to say that the power must be exercised fairly and in a reasonable manner, and should not be such as would expose the action of the authority to a charge of acting arbitrarily and having any scant regard for a citizen's freedom, liberty and honour guaranteed by the Constitution of India.