In the course of our lives, especially in business or public dealings, we may encounter situations that test our understanding of law and procedure. I recently faced one such situation that offered deeper insights into how our legal system functions.
A few months ago, I received a police summon asking me to appear for an enquiry. Such summons naturally create anxiety. It was issued under Sections 91 and 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). While I have always respected legal processes, I wanted to fully understand the basis of this summon before responding.
After consulting legal experts and doing some personal research, I learned:
Section 91 CrPC allows the police or court to request documents or objects necessary for an investigation. It’s a tool to gather evidence, not to summon individuals for questioning unless specific documents are needed.
Section 160 CrPC permits police to summon witnesses for questioning only after an FIR (First Information Report) is registered. Without an FIR, this section cannot be used to call individuals for enquiry.
In my case, no FIR had been registered. The summon was purely based on a complaint filed by a third party, without any formal case initiated.
With this understanding, I approached the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. My counsel cited relevant legal precedents, including a 2004 judgment (Prakash Transports vs. Inspector of Police), which clearly states that without an FIR, police summons under these sections are invalid.
The Hon’ble Judge reviewed the facts and ruled in my favor. The summon was quashed, and the matter was closed. This reaffirmed a simple principle: law provides protection when we are aware of our rights and act within the system.
Legal systems exist to protect, but we must stay informed. This experience, while unsettling at first, became a valuable learning milestone.
Stay aware. Stay prepared.
AnandNataraj 