SANTOSH KUMAR SAHOO Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Jaydeba Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Behera, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

(2.) This application under Sec. 482, Crimial P.C. has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of the order dated 18.02.2016 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Ranpur in 2(a) C.C. 07/2016 so far as it directs issuance of N.B.W. against him.

(3.) Mr. Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order dated 18.02.2016 under Annexure-2 so far as it directed issuance of N.B.W. against the petitioner was legally vulnerable inasmuch as it contained no reason for issuance of said N.B.W. According to him, as per the settled principles of law, the learned J.M.F.C., Ranpur should have given detailed reasons for passing such an order and since he has not given any reasons, the said order should be quashed. He further submitted that as per the settled principles of law, issuance of non-bailable warrant involves interference with personal liberty, and, therefore, the learned J.M.F.C., Ranpur should have been extremely careful before issuing of non-bailable warrant as the same could only be issued to bring a person to court when summon or bailable warrant would be unlikely to have the desired result. He further contended that here instead of issuing of summons or a bailable warrant, straight away the learned Court below has issued non-bailable warrant without recording any reasons. In such background, he prayed that order directing issuance of N.B.W. be set aside.