2025:KER:22810 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1946 CRL.MC NO. 2262 OF 2025 CRIME NO.448/2024 OF Kannur City Police Station, Kannur MC NO.664 OF 2024 OF SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT, TALIPARAMBA PETITIONER/COUNTER PETITIONER: ANAS K. AGED 28 YEARS S/O. ASHRAF, KUDIKKINTAVIDA (H), THAYYIL P. O., KANNUR, PIN – 670003. BY ADVS. P.K.SUBHASH ASHITHA RIA MERIN CHINJO PAUL RESPONDENT/STATE: 1 THE SUBDIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE COURT OFFICE OF THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 670141. 2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KANNUR CITY POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 670023. 2025:KER:22810 CRL.MC NO. 2262 OF 2025 2 3 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN – 682031. SMT. PUSHPALATHA. M.K. SR.PP. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:22810 CRL.MC NO. 2262 OF 2025 3 ORDER Petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure A1 preliminary order under Section 130 of BNSS issued by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Taliparamba. According to the petitioner, the two crimes mentioned in Annexure A1 cannot be the basis for issuing an order curtailing his liberty. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that of the two crimes mentioned, Crime No.554 of 2022 is under Section 27(b) of the NDPS Act, for alleged consumption of Ganja and is a compoundable offence, and in the other crime (Crime No.448 of 2024), the offences are minor in nature. It is the contention of the learned counsel that other than reproducing the report of the SHO, the order does not indicate as to how the Sub Divisional Magistrate had arrived at the prima facie satisfaction that the activities of the petitioner pose an imminent threat to peace and 2025:KER:22810 CRL.MC NO. 2262 OF 2025 4 tranquility of the locality. 3. I heard the learned Public Prosecutor also. 4. This Court has repeatedly held that mere pendency of one or more crimes cannot be the basis for compelling a person to execute bond for keeping peace. The order should reflect the reasons and the basis of the satisfaction arrived at by the Sub Divisional Magistrate that the activities of such person is a threat to the peace and tranquility of a locality. As far as the case at hand is concerned, other than referring to the two crimes and the report of the Station House Officer, the Sub Divisional Magistrate has not stated the reasons for requiring the petitioner to execute the bond. On that short ground, the Crl.M.C is allowed and Annexure A1 order is quashed. Sd/- V.G.ARUN JUDGE Sru 2025:KER:22810 CRL.MC NO. 2262 OF 2025 5 APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 2262/2025 PETITIONER’S ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED NIL IN M.C.NO.664/2024 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT