Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. Vijayakumar, J
Sundram – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamilnadu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure to follow mandatory pre-summons notice procedures. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. procedural violations in summary proceedings necessitate quashing of summons. (Para 4 , 5) |
ORDER
The present petition has been filed seeking to quash a summon issued by the first respondent under Section 132 BNSS.
2. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the summons under Section 132 of BNSS has been issued without issuing any show cause notice as contemplated under Section 126(i) of BNS, 2023. He also relied upon a decision of this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2153 of 2023, dated
13.02.2023 in support of his contentions.
3. A perusal of the summons clearly reveal that the summons have been issued under Section 132 of BNSS. There is no allegation whatsoever in the summons that despite notice, the petitioner has not chosen to appear. Straightly relying upon L.I.R in LIR No.47 of 2026, the present summons have been issued directing him to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-.
4. A judgment of our High Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.2153 of 2023 in paragraph Nos.9 to 12 has held as follows:-
“9. As rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Executi
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
