IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 816 of 2009(D) --------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ ABDUL HAKEEM, S/O.KOCHUNNI, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,MANJUMMAL,UDHYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR SMT.M.T.SHEEBA SRI.P.A.RAJESH SRI.K.RAKESH RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE CITY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, COCHIN CITY- THROUGH THE P.PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-31. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM WEST TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM EAST TRAFFIC POLICE STATION , EDAPPALLY, COCHIN. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: app/- M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ================== Crl.M.C. No. 816 of 2009-D ================== Dated this the 24th day of June, 2009. O R D E R This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash Annexures B, D, F, G and H notices/summons issued by the Sub Inspector of Police, Ernakulam West Traffic Police Station, Kochi, directing the petitioner to appear before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam on a particular day in cases registered under Annexures A, C and E FIRs. The case of the petitioner is that the Sub Inspector of Police has no jurisdiction to issue summons to the accused directing him to appear for an offence under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code and therefore Annexures B, D, F, G and H notices/summons are to be quashed. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor were heard. Crl.M.C.No.816/2009-D -2- 3. Annexure B, D, F, G and H notices/summons were issued by the Sub Inspector of Police directing petitioner to appear before the Court and informing that he has to appear before the Court for the offence committed under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code. As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, as provided under Section 60(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, every summons has to be issued by the court in writing, in duplicate, and signed by the Presiding Officer of the court or by such other officer as the High Court, from time to time, direct and it shall bear the seal of the court. Though Section 206 of Code of Criminal Procedure provides for issue of special summons in respect of petty offences, even that special summons can be issued by the Magistrate only after taking congizance. 4. When a final report is filed by the Police or such other authority competent to submit, it is for the Magistrate to decide whether cognizance on the final report is to be Crl.M.C.No.816/2009-D -3- taken or not. The Magistrate can either take cognizance or direct further investigation or even drop the proceedings. Till the Magistrate decides the option to be exercised, no summons could be sent to an accused by the investigating officer. As all these summons were issued by the Sub Inspector, before the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offences, all the summons are illegal and are quashed. Petitioner is entitled to approach the Magistrate for interim custody under Section 451 of Code of Criminal Procedure for appropriate relief. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE dkr