RAM NARAIN AND OTHERS versus STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [1973] 1 S.C.R. 738 · Decided: 28-07-1972 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: I.D. DUA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

.738 
RAM NARAIN SINGH AND OTHERS 
J::. 
STATE OF BIHAR 
July 28. 1972 
lI. D. DUA AND H. R. KHANNA, JJ.] 
Code of-CrimillCI/ Procedure (Act 5 of 1898), s. 101-Lapse of time 
hefu,'een date of incident and ·dispos'G.Z of proceedings-Danger of breach 
of peace non.existent-Expediency of r,equiring bonds under section. 
. 
Section 107, Cr. P. C. is designed to enable the Magistrate to take 
measures with a view to prevent commission of offences inV\Jlving breach 
of peace or disturbance of public tranquillity. 
It is not correct to .ay 
that once the per'iod for which the bond was ordered to be executed had 
expired the order becomes nugatory. because. it would lead to the re>ult 
that the proceedings under ·the section would have to be dropped if the 
person prodileded against succeeds in protracting the proceedin~s even 
though the apprehension of breach of peace or disturbance of public Iran· 
quillity still persists. 
[740B-Fl 
But the court is not precluded from taking into account subsequent 
events. If the material on record discloses that the danger of breach of 
peace has disappeared the Court can drop the proceedings and discharge 
the per~on proceeded against. 
Even in the absencle of positive evidence 
of reconciliation between the oprosing parties. "if the Court finds that 
since the date of the incident 
complained of, a very long 
period had 
elapsed during which nothing untoward had happened the Court may 
draw the infercn..:.c 
th<it the danger of breach of peace has vanished. 
[740-.HJ 
In the present c'ase, the appellants were ordered in 1959 to fu,nish 
bonds under the section. 
The amount of the bonds was reducecl by the 
appellate court. 
A revision by the appellants to the High Court against 
the order to furnish the bonds \\'as dismissed. 
The bonds, ho\Ve\'er. 'Vere 
not exec.uted be~au<e of stay orders passed by the courts. 
Th<. appeal 
against the High Court's order was disposed of by this Court in 1972, and 
during the U years that the matter was pending in the lower Courts and 
this Court, the appellants had not done anything which may cause appre-
hension of breach of peace. 
[740H; 741A-Bl 
Therefore, it was not expedient to compel thcqi to execute the bonds. 
CRLMINAL APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION: 
Criminal 
Appeal 
No. 63 (N) of 1968. 
Appeal from the judgmen and order dated July 10, 1967 of 
the Patna High Court in Criminal Revision No. 932 of 1967. 
U. P. Sfn[fh, for the appellants. 
N. S. Bindra and R. C. Prasad, for the respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
Khanna, .J.-This is an appeal by special leave by Ram Narain 
Singh and six others against the judgment of Patna High Court, 
wher-~by their revision petition was dismissed in limine. 
There was a dispute between the appellants on the one side 
and Ram Prasad and others on the opposite side in re.spect of 
A 
8 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
R. N. SINGH V. BIHAR (Khanna, J.) 
739 
plot No. 23 situated in village Deayapur in District Patna. Pro-
ceedings under section 144 of the Code of Criminal Proc~dure 
were taken in september, 1958 because of th.at dispu1le. 
In Oc-
tober, 1959 dispute again arose between the parties because of 
the alleged breaking of the idol of Durga by some of th~ appel-
lants. The idol was stated to have been installed by Ram Prasad. 
The breaking of the idol gave rise to a criminal case against Ram 
Narain Singh and Arjan Singh. 
The accused were, 
however. 
stated to have been acquitted in that case. 
On May 7. 
1959 
Ram Prasad filed an application before the Sub Divisional Magis-
trate Dinapur against the appellants and some others for taking 
action under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 
In 
that application it )'·as stated that there was a good mango crop 
in the land of Ram Prasad and the appellants and their com-
panions wanted to cause loss to Ram Prasad. 
The appellant>. 
it was further stated, used to carry lathis and held out threats to 
Ram Prasad. 
The learned magistrate sent that application 
to 
the police. 
The police then submitted a report and t\\'Ll cross 
cases were started against the opposite parties under scctioa 107 
of the Code of Criminal 
Procedure. 
Notices were 
thereafter 
issued to the parties to furnish bond. 
The appellants denied the 
allegations against them and stated that thev were peace loving 
citizens. 
They denied! having held out anv threat to Ram Pra.sad 
or having removed his mango fruits. 
The 
learned m:igistratc 
ord
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.