AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 25.10.2006 of the learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur in 2(a)(c)(c) case No. 188 of 2006in
taking cognizance of the offence under section 47(a) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act and issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest against him
after receipt of the prosecution report bearing No. 7 of 2006-07.
In case of Inder Mohan Goswami & another -Vrs.- State of Uttaranchal reported in (2008) 39 OCR (SC) 188. It is held as follows :
In complaint cases, at the first instance, the Court should direct serving of the summons along with the copy of the complaint. If the accused
seems to be avoiding the summons, the Court, in the second instance should issue bailable- warrant. In the third instance, when the Court is fully
satisfied that the accused is avoiding the Court''s proceeding intentionally, the process of issuance of the non-bailable warrant should be resorted
to. Personal liberty is paramount, therefore, we caution Courts at the first and second instance to refrain from issuing non-bailable warrants.
Therefore, the learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur was not justified in issuing NBW of arrest at the first instance after taking cognizance of the
offence. While not interfering with the order of cognizance, issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner stands quashed.
Learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur shall issue summons to the petitioner in accordance with law.
The CRLMC application partly allowed.