JUDGMENT

Sandeep Mehta, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned P.P. Perused the material on record.

2. By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C., 1973 the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 12.1.2017 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar in Cr. Case No. 11/2017 whereby whilst taking cognizance for offences under Section 27(B)(ii), 28 & 22(3) of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act, the trial court issued warrant of arrest against him.

3. Learned counsel Mr. Bhadu limits his challenge to the impugned order to the extent of warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner and reserves his right to raise all the objections on merits of the case before the trial court at the appropriate stage.

4. The prayer made by Mr. Bhadu is justified.

5. Considering the ratio of the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors. reported in AIR 2008 SC 251 , the trial court was not justified in issuing warrant of arrest against the petitioner at first instance.

6. Thus, the impugned order dated 12.1.2017 is modified and it is directed that the trial court shall now summon the petitioner through ba