SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Mad) 1673

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE
Prakash Transports, 100, Mosikiranar Street, Indira Nagar, Erode – 638 003 and 6 others
Versus
The Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch, Salem
Crl.O.P. No. 7018 of 2002
Decided on : 22-10-2003

Advocates Appeared:
Mr.N.A. Ravindran, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr.I. Subramanian, Public Prosecutor for Respondent.

Jurisdiction to issue summons under Section 160, Cr.P.C. is contingent upon the registration of a crime under Section 154, Cr.P.C.

Headnote:

Summons - Jurisdiction - Quashing of Summons under Section 160, Cr.P.C.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought to quash the summons issued by the respondent police under Section 160, Cr.P.C. as no crime was registered by the police, and therefore, the summons was without jurisdiction.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the summons issued by the police officer was without jurisdiction as no crime was registered, and therefore, it was quashed.

Issues: Jurisdiction of police to issue summons under Section 160, Cr.P.C. without a registered crime.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Section 160, Cr.P.C., summons could only be issued by a police officer making an investigation in connection with a registered crime under Section 154, Cr.P.C. Since no crime was registered, the summons was without jurisdiction and quashed.

Final Decision: The petition to quash the summons was allowed.

Judgment :

1. This is a petition to quash the summons issued by the respondent police. The summons issued to the petitioners is at page No. 1 of the typeset. The summons reads as follows :

In respect of complaint given by one Mr. G. Ravichandran, 41, Sankari Main Road, Annadanaptti, Salem, I hereby issue summon to you under Section 160, Cr.P.C. to 1 to 7 of you, requesting all of you to make yourself available before me at my office for my enquiry into the complaint of Mr. G. Ravichandran against you, on 15.3.2002 at 10.30 a.m. without fail”.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that as no crime was registered by the respondent-police, he has no jurisdiction to issue summons under Section 160, Cr.P.C. compelling the petitioners to appear before him and therefore, the summons has to be quashed. I find some substance in the said contention. The summons, which I have extracted above, shows that the officer did not even mention the crime number in the said summons. The learned Public Prosecutor also submits that no crime was registered by the respondent. If that be the case, it is not understandable as to how he should issue summons, since under Section 160, Cr.P.C., summons could be issued by any police officer making an investigation under that Chapter, which means that investigation is a sine qua non for issuing summons and the investigation can be conducted only in connection with the crime registered in terms of Section 154, Cr.P.C. Since there is no crime registered in terms of Section 154, Cr.P.C., no summons can be issued under Section 160, Cr.P.C., summoning a person to appear before the officer. As the summons summoning the petitioners, issued by the officer, is without jurisdiction, it is quashed. The petition is allowed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top