HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.9863 of 2010 ORDER:- Petitioners herein are accused in P.R.C.No.67 of 2010 on the file of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tanuku. 2. It is seen that the said JFCM court on a private complaint took cognizance of the same for offences punishable under Sections 307 and 354 IPC read with Section 34 IPC against these petitioners who are A-1 to A-7 in the case and straightaway issued non-bailable warrants (NBWs) for their production before the court. Petitioners are questioning the said cognizance and issuance of NBWs straightaway by the learned Magistrate. 3. Petitioners lament through their counsel that the learned Magistrate without recording any reasons and without giving a finding as to the necessity for issuing NBWs issued NBWs as if they are not law abiding citizens. Sri Y.V.Ravi Prasad, the learned counsel for petitioners/accused, in the course of arguments stated across the Bar that he is confining his argument only to the validity of that portion of the order by which the learned Magistrate has issued NBWs. He also relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court given in Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal[1] and argued that the present impugned order of the Magistrate issuing NBWs is contrary to the law laid down in the aforesaid case. In fact in para-53 of the aforesaid judgment the Supreme Court has laid down the factors to be kept in mind by a court for issuing NBWs. The impugned order of the learned Magistrate shows that the above criterion has not been taken into account by him. Ms.Sangeetha Nair learned counsel appearing for the complainant in the case also did not raise any objection for recalling of the NBWs and so is the stand of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor in view of the above decision of the Supreme Court. 4. The principle laid down in the above decision is that in a complaint case the court should not straightaway issue NBWs but it should consider issuing summons in the first instance and only if the accused is showing recalcitrant attitude to face the trial then proceed to issue NBWs. This is stated in para-55 of the judgment of the Supreme Court stated supra. The impugned order of the JFCM does not show any reasons for issuing NBWs straightaway. In the circumstances that portion of the order of the learned Magistrate straightaway issuing NBWs is set aside while maintaining the rest of it. The petitioners shall surrender before the learned JFCM within fifteen days from today and, on such surrender, they are ordered to be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) to the satisfaction of the said court with an undertaking that they would appear before the said court or any other court as and when called upon to do so. 5. This petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. ______________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J 4th July 2011 CVRK Note: Issue copy by tomorrow. B/O CVRK [1] (2007) 12 SCC 1