Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SADHIQ, S/O. IBRAHIM KUTTY versus THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SADHIQ, S/O. IBRAHIM KUTTY v. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE - Crl MC No. 171 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 1737 (22 January 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl MC No. 171 of 2007()

1. SADHIQ, S/O. IBRAHIM KUTTY,
... Petitioner

2. SATHAR, S/O. NOORUDHEEN,

3. SHAFEEQ, S/O. IBRAHIMKUTTY,

4. NOUSHAD, S/O. MOIDEENKUNJU,

5. SHAJI, S/O. UMMAR,

6. SUDHEER, S/O.SALAHUDEEN,

7. SATHAR, S/O. ALIKUNJU,

8. BASHEER, S/O.HASSANKUNJU,

9. ANZAR, S/O. ALIKUNJU,

10. MUNEER, S/O. MUHAMMED,

11. ABDUL JABBAR, S/O. ABDULMAJEED,

12. SHAJI, S/O. SULAIMAN,

13. NOUSHAD, S/O. MUHAMMEDKUNJU,

14. SADIQ, S/O. ABDUL AZIZ,

15. SABU, S/O. IBRAHIMKUTTY,

16. NADEER, S/O. SHAHULHAMEED,

17. SANEER, S/O.MUHAMED KUNJU,

18. SHIHAB, S/O.SIYAD,

19. JILAMI, S/O. ABDUL SALAM,

20. NOUSHAD, S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED,

21. RASHEED, S/O. ABDUL AZIZ,

22. NIZAR, S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU,

Vs

1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent

2. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KOLLAM.

3. STATE OF KERALA,

For Petitioner :SRI.SUNNY MATHEW

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

Dated :22/01/2007

O R D E R

R.BASANT, J

Crl.M.C.No.171 of 2007

Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2007

ORDER

The petitioners are 22 of the 36 persons against whom the Sub Divisional Magistrate has initiated proceedings under Section 107 Cr.P.C on the basis of a report submitted to the Sub Divisional Magistrate by the local Sub Inspector of Police. The petitioners have not appeared before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, but have in turn come to this Court with a prayer that the proceedings initiated against them may be quashed.

2. Under Section 107 Cr.P.C, the petitioners were called upon to show cause before the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate as to why they should not be ordered to execute bonds. Normally the petitioners must be expected to appear before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and take the course available to them under Section 107 Cr.P.C.

3. In an appropriate case, the procedure prescribed under Section 107 Cr.P.C will not fetter the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings. But having gone through Annexure-A2 report submitted to the Sub Divisional Magistrate by the Sub Inspector of Police and Annexure-A3 order Crl.M.C.No.171 of 2007 2 passed by the learned Magistrate, I am satisfied that this is an eminently fit case where the petitioners must take resort to the ordinary and regular course of appearing before the Sub Divisional Magistrate and showing cause. I do not find any compelling reasons which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C to prematurely terminate the proceedings initiated under Chapter VIII of the Cr.P.C. This Crl.M.C is, in these circumstances, dismissed.

4. I make it clear that the dismissal of this petition will not in any way fetter the rights of any of the petitioners to raise the contention before the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate that there is no satisfactory allegations raised against them at all.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

rtr/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.