Quashed

Surya Narayan Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Sept 2021A482/15142/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the impugned cognizance and summoning order deemed to be passed on a printed proforma without due application of judicial mind. The court directed the lower court to pass a fresh order complying with legal requirements.

What did the court decide?

Cognizance order dated 20.07.2019 quashed; lower court directed to pass a fresh order applying judicial mind.

Surya Narayan Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 82

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15142 of 2021 Applicant :- Surya Narayan Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nikhil Kumar,Vijay Shankar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶4

Sri Nikhil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anshuman Singh, learned AGA for the State.

¶5

Sri Nikhil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant has raised several grounds to assail the impugned summoning order like allegations are omnibus, no date, time and place is mentioned, statements of prosecutrix under Section 161 Cr.P.C. have been typed and signatures have been obtained on them, which vitiates the provisions contained in Section 162 Cr.P.C. and then finally it is submitted that cognizance order is on a typed proforma and even it fails to make a mention of Sections under which cognizance has been taken.

¶6

As far as other grounds are concerned, they do not appeal to the judicial conscious of this Court inasmuch as FIR is a detailed description of the events and it cannot be expected to be an encyclopedia of events giving date, time and place of each and every happening especially when it is evident that accused-applicant is in a dominant position to exploit the complainant, who is admittedly working as Guest Lecturer in his department, therefore, these ground are not made out. However, the order of cognizance is cryptic. Learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad appears to have not applied his mind and has passed this order on a printed proforma, which is violative of the law laid down by this High Court in case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2009 (9) ADJ 778.

¶7

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, stated above and the law laid down in case of Ankit (supra), the impugned cognizance order dated 20.07.2019, is hereby quashed.

¶8

Learned court below is directed to pass a fresh order on the complaint after applying his judicial mind.

¶9

In above terms, petition is disposed off .

¶10

Order Date :- 20.9.2021

¶11

Ravi/-

Surya Narayan Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surya Narayan Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chandan Arora Vs State of U.P. and Another

Deep Bhartiya and 16 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sunita ( Mother_in_ Law ) and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Shankar Singh Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Anisuddin Ahmad Khan and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Malkhan Vs State of U.P. and Another