IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 3322 of 2009 ---------------------------------- (CR.NO.2984/09 OF THE CITY TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) .............. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- SHABEER, S/O.MUHAMMED SALI, "PRIYADARSINI", MANKULAM, MUTTADA, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.T.G.RAJENDRAN. RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT/STATE: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CITY TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ CRL.M.C.NO. 3322 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 24th November 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexure-I notice issued to the petitioner by Sub Inspector of police, City Traffic Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram in crime No.2984/2009 registered for the offence under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code and 185 of Motor Vehicles Act directing him to appear before Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thiruvananthapuram on 12/10/2009. Case of the petitioner is that there is no FIR in this case and Annexure-I notice is illegal and when final report is filed before the court, it is for the court to issue summons and not for the police to issue a notice for appearance in court. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that under Section 170 of Code of Criminal Procedure, an accused in bailable case may be released by the police after obtaining security with a direction to appear before the Magistrate on a day fixed and as the Crmc 3322/09 2 offences are bailable, Annexure-I notice was issued. Learned counsel submitted that after investigation, final report has already been submitted before the learned Magistrate. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that direction provided under Sub Section 1 of Section 170 is only after completing the investigation and satisfying that the accused is to stand for trial and not a notice issued on the day when the case is registered. 3. When final report is filed under Section 173(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure and cognizance is taken by the Magistrate, necessarily summons is to be issued to the accused by the court. In such circumstances, I do not find it necessary to consider the validity of Annexure-I notice in this case. Petitioner is entitled to challenge the final report. With that liberty the petition is disposed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.