section 144 : Power to order issue in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended

danger

1) in cases where, in the opinion of a district magistrate , sub divisional magistrate or any other
executive magistrate specially empowered by the state government in this behalf, there is
sufficient ground for proceeding

Under this section and immediate prevention or speedy direction is likely to prevent, or tends to
prevent, obstruction,annoyance or injury to a person lawfully unemployed or danger to human
life, health safety or a disturbance of the public tranquility or a riot Oran affray, remedy is
desirable, such magistrate may, by a written order stating the material facts of the case and
served in the manner provided by section 134, any person to abstrain from a certain act or to
take certain order with respect to certain property in his possesion or under his management if
such magistrate consider that such direction is likely to prevent or tends to prevent
obstruction,annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed or danger to human life health
safety or a disturbance of the public tranquility or riot of an affray.

2) an order under this section May,in cases of emergency or in cases where the circumstances
don't admit of the serving in due time of a notice upon the person against whom the order is
directed, be passed ex Parte

3) an order under the section may be directed to a particular individual or to person residing in a
particular place or area or to the public generally when frequenting or visiting a particular place
or area.

4) no order under this section shall remain in Force for more than 2 months from the making
thereof:
 Provided that, if the state govt. considers it necessary so to do for preventing danger to human
life,health or safety or for preventing a riot or affray, it may by notification direct that an order
made by a magistrate under section shall remain in Force for such further period not exceeding
Six months from the date on which the order made by the

Magistrate would have, but for such order expired as it may specify in the said notification.

5) any magistrate me either on his own motion or on the application of any person aggrieved
rescind or Alter any order made under this section by himself or any magistrate subordinate to
himself or by his predecessor in office.

6) The state government may either on its own motion OR on the application of any person
aggrieved rescind or Alter any order made by it under the provision to subsection .

7) where an application under subsection (5) or sub- section ( 6) is receive the magistrate or the
state government as the case may be shall afford to the applicant an early opportunity of
appearing before him or it either in person or by pleader and showing cause against the order and
if the magistrate or the state government as the case may be rejects the application wholly Or in
part he or it shall record in writing the reasons for so doing.

Under The Criminal Procedure Code wide powers have been conferred on an executive
magistrate to deal with emergent situations.

one such provision deals with the magistrate powers to impose restrictions on the personal
liberties of individuals weather in a specific locality or in a town itself where the situation has the
potential to cause unrest or danger to peace and tranquility in Such an area Due to certain dispute
in brief section 144 conferred power to issue an order absolute at once in urgent cases of
nuisance or apprehended danger. specified classes of magistrate may make such orders then in
their opinion there is sufficient ground for proceeding under the section and immediate
prevention for speedy remedy is desirable. it required the magistrate to issue the order in writing
setting forth the material facts of the case and the Order is to be served in the manner provided
by section 134 of The Criminal Procedure Code. the wording of this section envisages a situation
where in the power provided there under may be exercised on the assessment of the magistrate
himself subjective satisfaction however the judicial pronouncement as deal with in the paper
apply shown that certain string and conditions have been composed by the quote on the most
plannery powers therefore as the case law discussed would indicate not only would the court
consider the situation as as by the magistrate but would also take into cognizance factors as to
whether the orders issued under section 144 where vague or attracted to a specific person.

Therefore in many cases the orders issued under the provision may be struck down notes quickly
on the ground that such orders were not warranted by the circumstances but also give two factors
that the order so if you did not specifically mention the area on which the restriction are
composed and so on the courts have therefore late Sachin faces on the importance of following
guidelines mentioned under section 134 as also in the various subsection 1 of section 144.

Paper begins its analysis by first expanding on the scope of section 144 followed by the
explanation regarding the condition that need to be fulfilled in order to invoke it for the in the
paper details of an order under the section elaborated upon like its contents duration and mode of
its service while explaining the above judicial pronouncements have been relied upon to sustain
it as well as indicated the meaning of the section.

Comments:
IV branch of Preventive jurisdiction deals with cases urgent in their character of either nuisance
for apprehend danger

Referred to is public tranquility or right or left the very urgency of the case demands the longest
side of the user formalities and preliminaries to the making of an order cases of ordinary public
nuisance shown of their agency have been deal with earlier order under this section can be issued
ex Parte but they are always temporary in their duration for they remain in is force only for 2
months and only in exceptional cases the state government can enhance the duration upto a
further period of 6 months. An order under this section is an executive order for preserving peace

Who held at reasonable restriction to carry on trade can be imposed for the preservation of peace
and Sachin order could be said to be invalid drinking article 19 1 G of the constitution

In case BBN School versus district magistrate Allahabad 1990 it was held in the same case that
the expression public tranquility is not used in restricted sense of public order as understood
under the preventive detention law

In Khan versus executive magistrate union territory 1991 it was held that the executive
magistrate has wide powers under this section when the magistrate came to the conclusion that
the situation was created which had disturb public tranquility and danger to human life and order
passed under section 144 is legal to.

The scheme and the provisions of the section shown that it is mean to provide for temporary
remedy to meet an emergency and that it applies to cases where for a temporary order in the
nature of things would be appropriate and would afford a reasonable adequate relief under the
circumstances of the case

The object of this section is to enable of magistrate in cases of emergency make an immediate
order for the purpose of preventing and environment breach of the peace expectra but it is not
intended to relieve him of the duty of making a proper enquiry into the circumstances which
make it likely that such breach of the peace expectra will occur as held in case of a bull versus
lucky Narayan Mandal 1879

The extent of the authority by the magistrate is to spend the exercise of the right on particular
occasions and not to prove it prove it it absolutely and before the occasion arises which entitles
him to act.

These restrictions are within the limits of the saving provision of article 19 to and 13 of the
Constitution as was decided in the case Ram Manohar Lohia 1968

Exercise of power under section 144 of the CrPC must be in aid of the legal right and against
those who interfere with the law of exercise their of.

In case of Prabhash Kumar Roy versus the officer incharge Rani Nagar police station 1985 and
order under section 144 prohibiting the petitioners from taking out and immersion procession of
Goddess Durga and passing in front of Mosque you with music on a particular day was held to
be quality of the rights granted by article 25 and 26 of the Constitution of the processing S6. An
order under section 144 tracking the respondent to remove a band of tracking the flow of water
was Quest as it was unlimited in duration and permanent effect in case of 3rd Panchayat versus
Kanjirappally Panchayat 1984. Increase HB Le versus state of Bihar 1988 June magistrate can
not order party to be disposed and order other party to be put in position in a proceeding under
section 1443.

In case Ravi Raman Prasad vs State of Bihar 1994 Where are was given protection of the house
in dispute through execution of a Civil Court decree against the Legend tenant in subsequent
proceeding under section 144 of CrPC the magistrate also ultimately past orders for position in
his favour but the high court appointed state property owner role appreciation of fact, the
supreme court while setting aside the high court order have that actually the magistrate by giving
position to are simpler maintain status you and I had already at white possession through eviction
proceeding in civil courts for.

Action under this section is anticipatory that is is utilised to restrict certain action even before
they actually occur anticipatory restrictions are imposed generally in cases of emergency where
there is an apprehended danger of some event that has to be processed potential public nuisance
over damage to public tranquility the guest of action under section 144 is the urgency of the
situation its efficiency is the likelihood of being able to prevent some harmful occurrences

Preservation of the public peace and tranquility is the primary function of the Government and
the EPFO State Power is conferred on the executive magistrate see in every language to perform
their function effectively during the emergency situation in the case of Radhe 10 versus Jayaram
method and others then dispute was over a piece of property the petitioners applied for restriction
on the respondent from entering the property which was ordered by the magistrate under section
144. However while the judicial proceeding where in way the respondents to claim for the same
prohibition on the petitioner which was subsequently granted by the magistrate under the same
section the respondent in response to this order brought the present action on the ground that
there right over the property was being violated by the order the court held that if the situation
demands any action then for prevention of public peace and tranquility the individual right of a
person can be renowned for the greater benefit of the society at large.

The principles that must be born in the mind before the application of this section
has also been elaborated upon in the case of Manzoor Hasan versus Mohammad
zamaan and approved in the case of Shakespeare rubik's versus colour in the pati.

They are:

1) urgency of the situation and the power is to be used for maintaining public peace and
tranquility

2) private rights may be temporary overridden when there is a conflict between public interest
and private rights
3) questions of title to properties for entitlements to rights or dispute of civil nature are not open
for adjust action in proceeding under section 144

4) where those questions have already been decided by the Civil courts or by judicial
pronouncements the magistrate should exercise their power under section 144 in aid of those
rights and against those who interfere with the local exercise their of

5) the consideration should not be the restriction what effect only a minor section of rather that
larger section more vociferous and militant

It confirms full power on certain magistrate to take form action in cases of emergency
when immediate prevention of speedy remedy is desirable if there is neither and urgency calling
for the application of speedy remedy no apprehension of danger to human life healthy of safety
acceptor the magistrate cannot issue an order under this section as it is possible to an absolutely
and even ex Parte is it is obvious that the emergency must meet certain and the consequences
sufficiently grave without it the power would be totally to tell the magistrate should apply his
mind to see whether the matter is of such urgency as to require an order under section

To the power is conferred under the section is extraordinary considering the fact that is enables
when to suspend the lower right of a person if they think such a suspension will be the interest of
public peace and safety but the registered should bear in mind that every citizen has a right to
ventilate please give me answer the weather in public and private and ask for address the right
cannot be curtailed so long as it is exercise in a lawful manner it is an illegal assumption of
power to issue an order under this section on a pretended apprehension of the danger of the
breach of the public piece

However section 144 is intended to provide for an emergency and it is idle to content that in an
emergency when the right is apprehended and where there is apprehension of a serious
disturbance of the public tranquility the magistrate is required to deliberate upon and decided the
right of the parties before acting
The petitioner in this case was stated to be the greatest fear of send and have done and every
religious festivals which were objective to a large number of Muslim considering the situation
the DM of the state by an order under section 144 prohibited the celebration of this festival five
this order was objective by the peace and his followers as it contains a right to worship the pot
disagree with this contention and answer the argument to the following reasons in the case of
Khushi Mukherjee baby versus Hema Malini 1933

" section is intended to provide for an emergency and it is idle to content that in an emergency
when a right is apprehended and where there is apprehension of serious disturbance of the public
tranquility the magistrate is required to deliberate upon and decide the right of the parties before
acting"

The order mustard the fat on the basis of which state has decided to invoke this section the
statement of a magistrate that he considered the care to be eminent is not sufficient to give him
jurisdiction if the fact set out by him show that really there was no urgent necessity for action in
its connection

Another. Is consideration is that order under section 144 cannot be of permanent or semi
permanent nature this was held in the case of Acharya Jagadish Anand avadhut versus police
commissioner Calcutta what we will take from conducting Tandava dance on the streets ok carry
schools in their profession by an order of the Commissioner under section 144 of the quote the
first order lasted for 2 months and then after every gap of 2 month the Commissioner again
issued the same order. Distribution of order was challenge the Supreme Court has this act of the
Commissioner as an abuse of power as stated on page 58 that

" the Parliament never intended the wife on an order under section 144 of the pot to remain in 4th
B on two month when made by a magistrate the scheme of Dead section does not want explained
repetitive Orders and in case the situation so parents steps have to be taken under other
provisions of the low where individual disputes are raised if repeatable orders are made it clearly
amount to abuse of the power conferred by section 144 of the court "

Rationally for the application of section 144:

Under section are available only when it is likely to prevent any of the following events from
happening

1) Annoyance: Either or mental in the case of physical environment a certain degree of proximity
between the object Android and is but in the case of mental and no and no question of proximity
arises section cover both kinds of annoyance 6 section 144 criminal procedure newspaper in the
proper cases of instruments to riches of the peace or to commit nuisance danger to life for health
or to annoy office floor fully employed even where an order under this section deals with the
nuisance there must be a danger to life or health involved for Orphan left or right or breach of the
place where defamatory statements and even highly object table above articles against prominent
officials cannot be deal with under section unless they are likely to lead to a breach of the peace
O2 and nuisance endangering life for health the section should not be abused by using it for
dealing with abusive articles and information not likely to lead a breach of peace

2) injury to human life: A magistrate has no jurisdiction to make an order under this section near
me for the protection of property got to be satisfied that the directions likely to prevent injury or
risk of injury to human life ok safety most of the act contemplated by this section of the nature
that if not prevented they were developed into an open but there is at least one item about with
this Limited view is not possible the word injury every fine under Section 44 of the IPC state any
harm weather illegal equals to any person is body mind reputation and what is legal define under
section 43 of the same code is applicable for everything which is prohibited by law with furniture
a ground for a civil action where whenever an injury is caused to a person to reach course to this
section can be taken in those situation so even if the act of the major component of be not such as
wood amount to an open when allowed to be completed wood furniture ground for a civil action
only

3) disturbance of public tranquility: The act prohibited under this section must he prohibited if it
is likely to prevent obstructions accept or disturbance of the public tranquility accept it is not
enough to say that by stretching several possible it is one after the other it is possible to establish
the connection of code and effect between the exploited and disturbance of public tranquility the
connection must be reasonable or approximate and not merely speculative or distant where there
are no circumstances peculier to the locality and the matter is of general impression the absence
of any near original connection between the prohibition act and the sports danger to public
tranquility will be a ground upon which the high court is born to act

4) order cannot be made to give advantage to one party: The section does not give white power
to the magistrate and imminent danger to the public peace main justify interference with even
private interest but the section is not be in walk by one party to a dispute to secure a material
advantage over the other

Constitutional validity of this section:

Hidayatullah CG stated in the celebrated case of Madhulika versus SDM non gear that section 1
is not unconstitutional if properly applied and the fact that it may be abused is no ground for its
being struck down and the provision of the chord properly understood or not in excess of the
limits laid down in the constitution for restricting the freedom granted in it and this is preciously
why the court held that section 144 of The Criminal Procedure Code is valid and constitutional

The property of the order is open to challenge it cannot be said that by reason of the wild
amplitude of the power which section 144 confirm on certain magistrates it places and
reasonable restriction on certain fundamental rights the conferment of such wide powers on the
magistrate does not therefore amount to an infringement of the rights granted under the section
of the Constitution in this case the magistrate gave a positive order under the section 144 in order
to avoid this couple between members of to labour unions the petitioner year calendar provision
as giving arbitrary power should a magistrate for calling the power not as arbitrary the court said
that as power can only be exercise in cases of emergency therefore it in a way that act of
magistrate

Just because there is a chance of abuse does not mean that the section should be struck down
whenever it appears to the magistrate the power is conferred on the district magistrate sub
divisional magistrate or any executive magistrate specially empowered by the state government
that

(a) immediate prevention of a public nuisance over

(b) speedy remedy of apprehend danger is desirable he may issue a return order the order must
set forth material it must either attract any person to obtain from a certain act or to take certain
order with certain property inspiration or under his management

The direction can be given only in the three cases specified in this section namely
to prevent
1) obstruction or injury to any person no fully employed

2) danger to human life health or safety or

3) disturbance of the public tranquility or right of affray

In cases of emergency in the order can be passed ex Parte it my device directly to a person
individually or two persons residing in a particular area or to the public generally when present
in a particular place from magistrate of the state government made the second or elder the order
either you Moto or an application of the person aggrieved on shape of the application of the
person is entitled to be here if the application is rejected reason for rejection should be recorded
in writing the audience can at the most remain in food for 8 months

Incase M 10 versus DC 10 1989 it was held at the jurisdiction of the executive sub divisional
magistrate is concerned with the jurisdiction of the executive magistrate the main object of the
provision is prevention of the breach of peace then the provision is a preventive measures having
the same priority of Jurisdiction cannot be considered as such circumstances of the preceding by
the sub divisional magistrate and not the executive magistrate does not call for an interference in
division

In the case of Madhu Limaye a i r 1971 it was seen that the gift of the action under this section is
the urgency of the situation its efficiency is the likelihood of being able to prevent some harmful
occurrences as it is possible under this section to add ex-parte it is observed that the emergency
must be done and the emergency must meet certain and the consequences efficiently Grave but
there is no general proposition that an order under this action cannot be passed without taking
evidence
There were number of contentions raised by the Council of the petitioner however the supreme
court demolished each of them one by one there were five points judgement justify the
constitutionality of section 144.

They are follows:

1) the magistrate has a power under this section to pass order ex Parte however generally the
procedure that is followed is a notice to the person against whom the order is being passed only
in cases of extreme critical situations that the magistrate has to Resort to passing an ex Parte
order

2) additional the person aggrieved by the order have a right to challenge the order on the grounds
define appropriate the view that the power granted under the section is not arbitrary

3) to substantiate the above an opportunity for wearing and to show Cause is also provided to the
person charging the order of the magistrate therefore the principles of natural justice are also
complied with under the section

4) next the court also stated that the fact that the aggrieved party has the right to challenge the
property of the order makes the action of the magistrate more reasonable and based on cogent
reason

5) the high court's power of revision under section 435 of the code read with section 439 of the
cord also makes up for the condition that the order under section 144 is not available the high
court can I request the order for as the magistrate for the material facts therefore ensuring
accountability of the magistrate

Since the decision of the supreme court in the case mentioned above there has been a number of
cases where the courts have accepted this approach and have that the preventive action under this
section 144 justify

Additional e restriction which is post to the fundamental principles of liberty and Justice cannot
be considered reasonable one of the test to find out whether a restriction is reasonable or not if
you see whether the aggrieved party has a right of Representation against the restrictions
imposed or proposed to be impost no person can be deprived of Liberty without being awarded
an opportunity to be heard in defence and that of a cutie must be adequate fear and reasonable for
the the court have to see whether the Earth destruction of the requirement for whether it is
important in a arbitrary manner

Condition precedent to assuming jurisdiction :

The first thing which a magistrate has got be satisfied about his dad this assumption ground for
proceeding under section and immediate prevention of speedy remedy is desirable and element
which has go to any person Loafer employed or danger life health or safety of a disturbance of
the public tranquility or right of an affrray.

The circumstances calling for an order must be circumstances of emergency and an order passed
when there is no emergency is without you must decide as a matter of fact whether the dispute is
likely to lead to a breach of the peace for the disturbance of public tranquility the urgency of a
case of nuisance for apprehended danger is essential to its treatment under section 144 of the
code and the orders to be passed under this section must be of a temporary nature as is shown
clearly by sub Section 4 of section 144 providing that no order under this section shall remain in
Force for more than 2 months from the for the purpose of section 144 it is only necessary that the
magistrate issue in the order should believe that apprehension of nuisance a danger exits no pro
roof existence of such apprehension is the record of the magistrate should disclose the existence
of an emergency which code for an ex Parte order under this section or that there was no
sufficient time to serve notice on the party affected thereby

An order under section must be based upon proper evidence absence of such as evidence the
magistrate can not passed an order medley on the complaint of one party the property used to be
made on this action is to meet temporary agency for keep things in status quo and not passed an
order which has practically the effect of mandatory injunction in favour of one of two opposing
parties near by his able to deprive The Other completely of his ordinary legal rights and all
practical purposes.

Contents of order:

a) order must be in writing: The words used under section 144 is a right turn order and therefore
the order issued under the section must always be in writing there must be a return order
attracted to the accused and duly promulgated before he can be prosecuted for disobedience of
the order if there is no return order a prosecution under section 188 IPC for the disobedience of a
near verbal order cannot stand

Section in powers of magistrate to interfere material with the liberty of the subjects it is
necessary that he should promulgate his order in term sufficiently cleared to enable the public for
person affected by 8 to know exactly what it is which they are prohibited from doing it is for the
reason that section 144 itself make it obligate tree for the magistrate in any such order to indicate
the material fact with justify Sachin order however it is not mandatory for the magistrate to take
evidence before Sachin order

b) order must be specified and definite in terms- the auditor under this section must be one which
is absolute and definite in terms section 144 1 and 2 do not contemplate the passing of a
conditional order to be made absolute later on or one that is pregnant with wegener's this is
important as the person to this order issued must know exactly what is that he is prohibited from
undertaking.

It is vital for the magistrate to mention the following in the order under section 144 they are
firstly the act conduct which prohibited and secondly the people who are prohibited from doing
so the order should have name for a specific person and the prohibited act should be explained
with reasonable Precision ambiguity of any kind should be avoided as much as possiblec

c) material facts must be started in the order- the order must contain statement of the material
facts which the magistrate considered to be facts of the case and upon the footing of which he
basis is order the provision of section 144 only required the material facts to be stated and not the
ground or reason out the details substance of the information on which the order is placed where
the order did not state the material fact it was set aside to justify an order under section 154 they
must be a casual connection between the activated and the danger apprehended

Where the order does not show that for which the order has been issued the order cannot be
sustained
d) prohibition must be clearly stated- the thing which is prohibited must be clearly stated it is not
proper to live in doubt as to whether the persons are prohibited from doing the thing or not the
order must state as to against whom the prohibition order app live and what are they prohibited
from doing are required to do except where the order is addressed to the public in general as
under subsection 3 against home order retracted must be specified if the order is not definite and
clear it become extremely difficult for enforcement for example if an order but connected to the
public frequent public or private Street in a particular City Sachin order would be considered to
be sufficiently definite as to play and hence cannot be had to be wake it must have ever be
quotient that the duration of the order must be co-extensive with thw emergency.

Persons to home order can be directed :

This subsection is an exception to the general rule that the order shall be attracted to a particular
person the effect of the order being in the interest of public order being in the interest of the
public order and the interest of the general public occasions may arise when it is not possible to
distinguish between ball whose conduct must be controlled and those who conducts clear a
General order may be necessary when the number of person is so large that mentioned in the
section 12

Order can be issued to the public Generally Accepted and requesting for visiting a particular
place it was decided in case of Satya Narayan 1939 that an order to the public under this section
prohibiting the publication of circulation of false or alarmist report is bad in law 13 where the
order was 1 prohibited in the public generally against the collection of brickbats or other missiles
in the village it was held at the order would be operative to prohibited the owners occupiers of
private house in the village from elasticsearch missiles in their houses
The place of locality to which an order under this Clause is applied should be so clearly defined
as to enable the public to know at once area is the expression particular place is not confined to a
particular selected place like a market or a park but includes a part of a town provided that the
path is sufficiently well defined with clear 15 so distinguish a bus and so that the public may be
under no miss apprehension or doubt as to what the prohibited area is

A person who is president of a particular place is a person's requirements or visits it within the
meaning of this section he is even otherwise covered by the sub section the load does not contain
played the prohibition of the frequent in or visiting of the particular place to which reference is
made in the sub section but the probation of some act on an occasion on which such places
visited on frequented

It was held by the supreme court and the kind of Orders mention in section 144 3 are obviously
intended to prevent dangerous to life health and safety or peace and tranquility of members of the
public they are only temporary orders which cannot last day on two months from the making
their of as is cleared from section 144 of the chord the questions of the title cannot be decided
here as all held in case of Mohammad Ghulam Abbas versus De Ibrahim 1978

Beating the Giving of cased dinner for preventing obstruction to catching of stray dogs or pro for
building the conduct of religious procession attended by music along public roads for beating the
public from participating in a location within the limits of the city are held to be valid orders

In case doctor Anindya Gopal Mitra vs State of West Bengal 1993 where the police
commissioner refused permission to the BJP a political party to hold public meeting and refused
relaxing prohibitory order and said that the holding of a meeting could not be totally prohibited
but necessary restrictions may be imposed and preventive measures may be taken
Service of the prohibited in order under section 144

In this section of the paper we would deal with the next stage of Orders issued under section 144
once the form of the order is proper the magistrate mast dance of the order upon those expressly
mentioned in the order itself for this section 134 of The Criminal Procedure Code is attracted
however occasions may be a reason when it is not possible to distinguish between those people
who conduct must be controlled and those who conducts clear in the circumstances urgent order
may be necessary where the number of person is so large that distinction between them and the
general public cannot be made in the circumstances a general service of order is done through
publication of the order in a daily newspaper except

Nevertheless under section 134 the order must be served on the person against whom it is made
sub section 14 year olds man's personal service is not possible a copy of the sad order must be
stuck up at such place as may be deemed fit under section to the notice issued must be followed
the terms of the order past and should not be caused in by the term therefore if the sad procedure
but not properly followed the order made would then be deemed illegal the person cannot be
convicted for any defence of the order under section 188 of The Criminal Procedure Code
however if it can be shown that the person against whom the order was detected did insect have
knowledge of such order be issued against him any irregularity in the method of promulgation
would not be itself make the order Ultra bites

Duration of the order

And expressly mentioned in the section and order passed under section 144 shall be subject to
subflows 4 and would therefore be valid only for a. of not competent to a magistrate to revive for
his order from time to time Sachin exercise power would clearly constitut abuse of power
Every order issued under the section is time to expire at the end of 2 month it is not competent to
Magistrate to revive or ticket his order from time to time as was decided in case Govinda Chetty
versus Perumal Chetty 1913 the grant of what in effect is an order for perfect Jewel injunction is
entirely beyond the magistrate's power successive promulgation of order under this section to
avoid a decision of the dispute is there and justify a bulb use of the magistrate's power held in
Usha Rani virtual Mangal 1917 so also in the case of Army Supply Company 1973 attraction by
a magistrate to the Electric Supply Company to restore supply of electric energy to the default in
municipality cannot be granted under this section because the direction continue sports but order
not bad if it come it to state the. of the Year Ram Nath Chaudhary.1

The state government can extend this time. of six month from the date of the expiry of the initial
order if it finds it imperative for prevention of certain situations causing disturbances of safety
health rupees but the same power should not be arbitrary or extensive and the manager of
imposition should be fair and just it is possible for the session judge of the high court to interfere
in revision even with regard to an order under section 144 of The Criminal Procedure Code in
exceptional cases when there is a clear and effect in the procedure or manifest error of the point
of law and consequently flagrant miscarriage of justice it was held in case Jila Parishad v. KC2
the proceedings therefore cannot be considered to be Holy Intel Core literary. of 60 days has to
be counted from the date of prohibitory order this was decided Maula bux Ansari versus ramrup
Sahar 1983

conclusion

After careful analysis of the concerned section in the light of judicial pronouncements and
academic commentry can be conducted with the essential of the section 144 alphabet

1
(1907) 34 Cal 897 FB.
2
1977 Cr LJ 1747 (All)
discriminatory is an essential element in the set of measures that undertaken by the executive
body of energy stick in order to prevent as well as manage situations of urgency

There have been numerous cases filed against section challenging the constitutional validity of
the section and an equal number of decisions a folding its legitimacy to discreetly powers are
conferred upon the magistrate under the section there are various factors on its exercise so as to
prevent any arbitration is for fairness in the order the fact that the high court can review the order
of a magistrate under section makes back side of the power more rationale.

Moreover the increasing cases of rights and other incidents during public peace and tranquility
have made it mandatory for the magistrate to have such power so as to secure the common
people the safety and peace which is essential for their living

How were at this juncture it may be opened that there appears to be a need to balance the
granting of plenary powers by the legislature to deal with emergency situations and the need to
protect the personal liberty and other freedoms granted to the citizens under the section
fundamental rights of the constitution article 21 making their of unless in cases of danger human
life health and safety oral likelihood of right of an x-ray the state government by notification in
the option gives it otherwise direct

Where this essential preliminary tourism in jurisdiction is not want to exist his order must be
Deemed to be an order having no legal force and expression of opinion contained there in must
be dm to be word of legal for a fact this action is to be applied in cases of urgency and should not
be allowed to take place of any other provision of law which might be more appropriate and
before proceeding the destruction the magistrate should hold any query and record the urgency of
the match.