CrPC Section 110 — Security for good behaviour from habitual offenders

CHAPTER VIII SECURITY FOR KEEPING THE PEACE AND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOUR

General

Summary

The provision applies when an Executive Magistrate receives information that a person is within the Magistrate’s local jurisdiction and falls into one or more of the categories below.

Under clause (a), the person is habitually a robber, house-breaker, thief or forger.

Under clause (b), the person habitually receives stolen property, knowing it to be stolen.

Under clause (c), the person habitually protects or shelters thieves, or helps conceal or dispose of stolen property.

Under clause (d), the person habitually commits, attempts to commit, or helps bring about the commission of kidnapping, abduction, extortion, cheating or mischief; an offence punishable under Chapter XII of the Indian Penal Code; or an offence punishable under sections 489A, 489B, 489C or 489D of that Code.

Under clause (e), the person habitually commits, attempts to commit, or helps bring about the commission of offences involving a breach of the peace.

Under clause (f), the person habitually commits, attempts to commit, or helps bring about the commission of the offences described in its sub-clauses. Under sub-clause (i), these include offences under the listed Acts: (a) the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940; (b) the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973; (c) the Employees’ Provident Fund and Family Pension Fund Act, 1952; (d) the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954; (e) the Essential Commodities Act, 1955; (f) the Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955; (g) the Customs Act, 1962; and (h) the Foreigners Act, 1946. Under sub-clause (ii), they also include offences punishable under any other law that provides for preventing hoarding or profiteering, adulteration of food or drugs, or corruption.

Under clause (g), the person is so desperate and dangerous that allowing them to remain at large without security would be hazardous to the community.

If the Magistrate receives information that a person meets one of these descriptions, the Magistrate may, following the procedure set out later, require the person to show cause why they should not be ordered to enter into a bond, with sureties, for good behaviour. The period set by the Magistrate must not exceed three years.

Official Text

When 2[an Executive Magistrate] receives information that there is within his local jurisdiction a person who—

(a) is by habit a robber, house-breaker, thief, or forger, or

(b) is by habit a receiver of stolen property knowing the same to have been stolen, or

(c) habitually protects or harbours thieves, or aids in the concealment or disposal of stolen property, or

(d) habitually commits, or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of, the offence of kidnapping, abduction, extortion, cheating or mischief, or any offence punishable under Chapter XII of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), or under section 489A, section 489B, section 489C or section 489D of that Code, or

(e) habitually commits, or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of, offences, involving a breach of the peace, or

(f) habitually commits, or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of—

(i) any offence under one or more of the following Acts, namely:—

(a) the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (23 of 1940); 1[

(b) the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (46 of 1973);]

(c) the Employees’ Provident Fund 2[and Family Pension Fund] Act, 1952 (19 of 1952);

(d) the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (37 of 1954);

(e) the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955);

(f) the Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 (22 of 1955);

(g) the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962); 3*** 4[

(h) the Foreigners Act, 1946 (31 of 1946); or]

(ii) any offence punishable under any other law providing for the prevention of hoarding or profiteering or of adulteration of food or drugs or of corruption, or

(g) is so desperate and dangerous to render his being at large without security hazardous to the community, such Magistrate may, in the manner hereinafter provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond, with sureties, for his good behaviour for such period, not exceeding three years, as the Magistrate thinks fit.

Referred to by

Related Judgments

  • ISTKAR vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR — Supreme Court of India (2022)
  • MADHU LIMAYE vs SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, MONGHYR & ORS — Supreme Court of India (1970)
  • DEVADASSAN vs THE SECOND CLASS EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, RAMANATHAPURAM & ORS — Supreme Court of India (2022)
  • SOM LAL vs VIJAY LAXMI & ORS — Supreme Court of India (2008)
  • SUKANYA SHANTHA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS — Supreme Court of India (2024)

Old <-> New Code Mapping

  • BNSS §129 — Security for good behaviour from habitual offenders