The single judge quashed a cognizance order and criminal proceeding because it was passed on a printed proforma without specific allegations assigning offense to the accused, relying on a prior Division Bench decision.
Quashed the cognizance order dated 23.11.2018 and the criminal proceeding; directed the court to pass a specific speaking order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8046 of 2022 Applicant :- Ramesh Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Avnish Kumar Srivastava,Mohammad Anas Raza Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
By means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant seeks to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 23.11.2018 and the entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 1097 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No.55 of 2015, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Bhelupur, District Varanasi, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Varanasi.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the cognizance order has been passed on a printed proforma just by filling up the blanks which shows that the officer concerned neither went through the documents nor applied his mind while passing the order so the prayer is made to quash the cognizance order dated 23.11.2018.
Learned A.G.A. does not dispute the aforesaid legal position.
A perusal of the record clearly shows that the cognizance order dated 23.11.2018 has been passed on a printed proforma after filing the names of the accused and sections of the offence, no specific allegation assigning to the accused has been mentioned.
The Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 16386 of 2020 (Shiv Kumar Verma and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) decided on 11.06.2021 has prohibited such type of practice. Thus, the cognizance order dated 23.11.2018 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Varanasi is hereby quashed with the direction to the court concerned to pass a specific speaking order in this regard.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 6.6.2022/S.K.
Digitally signed by SWEETY KANOJIA Date: 2022.06.10 13:51:37 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the impugned cognizance order passed on a printed proforma without specific allegations requires quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shiv Kumar Verma and another Vs. State of U.P. and othersRelied on¶8
Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 16386 of 2020 (Shiv Kumar Verma and another Vs. State of U.P. and others)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh Pandey
State Of U.P
Sadhna Rani Thakur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
