VIJAY BISHNOI, J. - (1.) This criminal revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner, while challenging the order dated 30.08.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Suratgarh, District Sri Ganganagar (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') whereby the learned trial court allowed the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and took cognisance against the petitioner for the offence under section 302, 341, 147, 148, 149 IPC preferred by the complainant. Later on, the petitioner was summoned through arrest warrant.
(2.) After arguing the matter for some time, the learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his prayer to the extent that the arrest warrant issued by the learned trial court for summoning the petitioner may be converted into bailable warrant.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami and Anr. v. State of Uttaranchal and Ors. reported in AIR 2008 Supreme Court 251 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:- "Non-bailable warrant should be issued to bring a person to court when summons or bailable warrants would be unlikely to have desired result. This could be when: It is reasonable to believe that the person will voluntarily appear in court; or the police authorities are unable to find the person to serve him with a summon; or it is considered that the person could harm someone if placed into custody. As far as possible, if the court is of the opinion that a summon will suffice in getting the appearance of the accused in the court, the summon or the bailable warrants should be preferred. The warrants either bailable or non-bailable should never be issued without proper scrutiny of facts and complete application of mind, due to the extremely serious consequence and ramifications which ensue on issuance of warrants. The court must very carefully examine whether the Criminal Complaint or FIR has been filed with an oblique motive.";