(1.) Petitioners seek quashment of order dated 17th April 2017 passed by Principal Sessions Judge, Srinagar, (for brevity "Revisional Court") and order of cognisance dated 29th June 2016, passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (2nd Additional Munsiff) Srinagar, (for short "Trial Magistrate") on grounds set out therein.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for parties and considered the matter.
(3.) Learned counsel for petitioners states that no specific allegation is vituperated against petitioners for commission of offence punishable under Section 406 RPC, nor police report specifically reflects petitioners committed any offence and entire material before learned Trial Magistrate is bereft of any such allegation that constitute an offence punishable under Section 406 RPC. Despite the same, learned Trial Magistrate is said to have issued summons to petitioners, which, according to counsel, is an attack to their right to liberty and that order has been passed in casual and mechanical manner and cannot sustain in eyes of law. Learned counsel contends that provisions of Section 177 Cr.P.C. provide that every offence shall ordinarily be enquired into and tried by a court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction it was committed, which makes no option for the court but to deal with only those matters, which have been committed or taken place within territorial jurisdiction of the court and therefore, order dated 13th December 2016 is in tune with procedural law and order of Revisional Court dated 17th April 2017 is bad in law, especially when Trial Magistrate has made it clear that the offence alleged had been committed in a different district and not at District Srinagar.