PULAVAR B M SENGUTTUVAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners who are accused No. 1 to 4 in the case registered by the respondent in his Crime No. 1/2003 have filed the above Criminal Original Petition praying to call for the records relating to the order passed by the respondent under Section 160(1) of Cr. P. C. dated 1-8-2003 and quash the same.

(2.) to the grounds offered by the petitioners they would submit that the impugned order issued compelling the petitioners who are the accused to be witnesses under Section 160(1) of Cr. P. C. is contrary to the Constitutional prohibition under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India; that the notice issued under Section 160(1) of Cr. P. C. is restricted only for a uniform and is a glaring illustration of mala fide exercise of powers on extraneous reasons and with ulterior motives; that the petitioners are always willing to co-operate with the investigation done in accordance with law; that the respondent failed to see that the petitioners are the accused under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and in fact the respondent has erred in passing such an order which is against law and the same will not be applicable to the accused in the crime registered by the respondent; that the respondent failed to note that section 160(1) of Cr. P. C. empowering to pass such order is only for the witnesses and not the accused; that the respondent has passed the order in excess of his jurisdictlonal issue; that the order in excess of his jurisdictional issue; that the order passed by the respondent is arbitrary since Section 160(1) does not empower the respondent to require the accused for an enquiry; that the order passed by the respondent is disproportionate and against law and is liable to be quashed. On such grounds the petitioners would pray for the relief extracted supra.

(3.) During arguments, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the accused in a case registered by the respondent for an offence punishable under Section 13(2) r/w 13(l)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 r/w Section 109 of I. P. C.; that on search and seizure the preliminary investigations were conducted and at this juncture the respondent has issued summons u/s. 160(1) of Cr. P. C. to appear as witnesses which is under challenge before this court in the above Criminal Original Petition.