VALAMPURI JOHN Vs. PETER ALIAS PETER JAMES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT is represented by the petitioner that even though the summons has not been served on the petitioner a warrant has been issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate, III, Dindigul in C.C. No. 818 of 1992 on his file. It is also brought to my notice that an application has been filed before the Magistrate under Section 70(2), Cr. P.C. to recall the warrant and without recalling the name, the Magistrate has dismissed that application without assigning valid reasons. I heard Mr. V. Padmanabhan, who at length argued regarding the manner of procedure under which the warrant or summon has to be issued. Whatever it is, when the application has been filed to recall the warrant, on come grounds, it must be considered and disposed of and the same should not be merely dismissed on the ground that the accused is not present in the Court. Therefore, since I do not find valid reason in the order of the lower Court, I set aside the same and direct the petitioner to appear in person before Lower Court and file an application again to recall the warrant under Section 70(2), Cr. P.C. and on the application so filed, the Magistrate, shall recall the warrant and direct the petitioner to appear in future after getting his undertaking that he will not fail to appear on subsequent hearing dates. Till then, the warrant issued against the petitioner need not be executed. With these observations, the revision is ordered accordingly.