Sankaranarayanan: 135 provisio A comes at a later stage. As far as we are concerned, the question is flavour of 127,128,129 comes from public order aspect.

Lets assume that there are two groups of people of different caste. And they fight. That will be 126 or 128. These are few cases where aspects are of both (public order and peace): Court

Sankaranarayanan refers to judgments on the subject.

Sankaranarayanan: That failure to comply make me entitled to come here in Article 226.

Sankaranarayanan: If i were to engage with the merits of allegations, then my remedy is not here. I am saying compliance with law.

Sankaranarayanan: There is no application of mind to show that hearsay information was supportive.

Court: Question is why should at this stage go into this?

Are there reasons in writing? If there are reasons to show application of mind by SEM then i am out of here. But if it isn’t, then they are out of here: Sankaranarayanan

Sankaranarayanan: The constitutional bench says reasons in writing, says hearsay would be converted into substance only when you apply mind and that bonds can be only under 135 or 136.

Sankaranarayanan: At every stage you have to give in writing. Hearsay can become actionable for show cause notice only when you apply mind to it. Bonds can never be on showcause notice stage.

Sankaranarayanan refers to a judgment.

Sankaranarayanan: Once enquiry is completed, then there is 136.

Court: At each stage, the scope of satisfaction becomes more justiciable in a 226 proceedings.

Sankaranarayanan: If that satisfaction is required and mandated under 130, it is not made out in first two paragraphs.

Sankaranarayanan: Stage 1 is substance, stage 2 is enquiry.

Court: In first instance, magistrate may decide that i am starting inquiry or between the time inquiry is done, magistrate can take decision i now want you to give bond because i have apprehension.