Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 110

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), ---S. 110-Security proceedings-Establishing charge under Cis. (a) & (b) of S. 110-No specific offence or previous conviction need be proved--Mere fact that person proceeded against had been discharged or acquitted in a specific case of substantive charge-No bar to proceedings under S. 110-Person a notorious bad character and 'a habitual thief High court declined to interfere with orders of lower Courts in circumstances. In the present case, 60 prosecution witnesses from different walks of life including professors, businessmen, Chairmen of Union Councils, Basic Democrats, village elders and so forth had been examined. Some of the witnesses examined by the prosecution were highly educated and respectable people of the locality. They had no enmity or grudge with the accused-petitioner and had also no reason to come before the Court to take false oaths. These disinterested and reliable witnesses had uniformly stated that the accused was a thief, robber, burglar, cattle-lifter and a receiver of stolen property and was also a terror to the people of the areas. Held: The evidence of the local leading and respectable persons unmistakably lead to the inference that the accused-petitioner is a habitual thief, robber etc. Both the Courts below have considered the evidence in their judgments and recorded independent findings on facts. The two Courts, on perusal of the evidence, both oral and documentary, have held that the accused-petitioner is a veteran and notorious thief, robber, dacoit, cattle-lifter and receiver of stolen property. The concurrent findings of facts recorded there in are quite reasonable. There is nothing on record to disturn concurrent findings of facts. In a proceeding under section 1 to, Criminal P. C. what the Magistrate is required to do is to scrutinise the evidence with the greatest care and come to the conclusion whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant an order demanding security. It is incumbent on the Magistrate before whom' the proceedings are pending to consider and weigh the evidence produced by the prosecution to prove that the person against whom the proceedings are started is…