RAVIKUMAR Vs. K M C VASANTHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Respondent. Perused the records.

(2.) The records disclose that Respondent No.1-Smt. K.M.C. Vasantha, has lodged an FIR before Chikmagaluru Town Police Station, against the petitioner herein for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 354(D), 506, 507 of IPC. The same has been registered in FIR No.23/2014. The allegations made in the FIR are that, the accused/petitioner was sending filthy messages to the respondent to her phone number with the help of various phone numbers and he was also threatening her with dire consequences of killing her husband and to kidnap her and will not allow her to live happily with her husband. On these allegations the police investigated the matter and submitted 'B' Summary Report to the Court. The Court passed an order on 30.07.2015 rejecting the 'B' Summary Report and registered a criminal case against the accused for the offences punishable under sections 354(D), 506 and 507 IPC. The order of issuance of summons has been called in question before this court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri P.P. Hedge, has strenuously contends that, the trial Magistrate has not even considered the contents of 'B' Summary Report and has not whispered anything about 'B' Summary Report as to why the same has to be rejected. Secondly, he contends that the objection filed to 'B' Summary Report does not contain any specific allegations against the petitioner which attract the provisions under Sections 506, 354 of IPC to take cognizance. Thirdly, the learned counsel contends that, the sworn statement given by the respondent and her husband also do not contain any specific allegation, which attract the above said provisions of Indian Penal Code. Therefore, the learned Magistrate without looking into all these matters has issued summons to the accused, which is bad in law and the same is liable to be quashed.