Directing lower courts to avoid the practice of
summoning accused or issuing non-bailable arrest warrants (NBWs)
unnecessarily, the Madras High Court Bench here has said: “Courts are
entitled to compel the appearance of the accused in criminal cases but
such insistence should not be for the mere pleasure of the accused being
seen in the dock.”
Justice S. Vimala made the
observation while setting aside a NBW issued by a Judicial Magistrate at
Peraiyur near here on May 24 against Felix Suresh Peter, Inspector of
Police, Nanguneri Circle in Tirunelveli district.
The
warrant had been issued after dismissing a petition filed by him to
condone the absence due to his preoccupation with law and order problems
in Nanguneri.
Pointing out that the Magistrate had
allowed a similar condonation petition filed on the same day for the
absence of the complainant V. Radhakrishnan, who had accused the
Inspector of having assaulted him besides confining him wrongfully, the
judge wondered why did the judicial officer dismiss the Inspector’s
petition alone when there was no likelihood of proceeding with trial.
“The
very existence of courts is for dispensation of justice. The process of
courts should not be used for harassment of parties. The insistence on
appearance of parties before the court should be made only if it becomes
absolutely necessary for some purpose… To insist on appearance of an
accused on a day when his presence has nothing to do with the progress
of the case will only result in harassment.
“A court
is expected to take into account various factors such as nature and
seriousness of the offence, character of the accused, the possibility of
the accused absconding, circumstances peculiar to the accused under
which he is not likely to abscond and also the larger interest of the
society,” before issuing arrest warrants to ensure their presence in the
court, the judge said.
Comments
Post a Comment