Partly allowed

Vikas and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 May 2022A482/8602/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Current Appellant challenged the summoning order dated 26.05.2018 as being passed without application of mind on a cyclostyled copy. The Court agreed and set aside the order, remanding the matter to the Trial Court for fresh orders of summoning and cognizance if deemed fit.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 26.05.2018 was set aside and the matter remanded to the concerned Magistrate for passing fresh orders.

Vikas and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8602 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vikas And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chitranshu Srivastav

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the cognizance/summoning order dated 26.05.2018 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Meerut in Case No. 16218 of 2021 (State Vs. Raju and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 328 of 2017 under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Meerut and also to quash the proceedings of the aforesaid case as well as charge sheet dated 20.12.2017 filed in the aforesaid case.

¶6

Counsel for the applicant confines his arguments to the first part of the submission that the summoning order is bereft of application of mind and has been passed on the cyclostyled copy. He thus argues that the summoning order suffers from the vice of non-application of mind and therefore is liable to be set aside on that ground alone. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 as well as Single Judge judgment and order passed by this Court in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another [(2009) (9) ADJ 778] on an Application No. 19647 of 2009 filed under Section 482 CrPC on 15.10.2009. He, thus, argues that the summoning order is liable to be set aside in view of the well settled law of this Court. He also placed before me several orders passed by this Court whereby similar orders have been set aside by this Court and the matters have been remanded before the Trial Court for fresh orders in accordance with law.

¶7

A perusal of the summoning order impugned in the present proceedings clearly demonstrates that there was no application of mind whatsoever prior to the passing of the summoning order, which has been repelled by this Court in various judgments.

¶8

In view of the categorical pronouncements of this Court, the impugned order dated 26.05.2018 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the concerned Magistrate for passing fresh orders of summoning and cognizance if it deems fit.

¶9

Consequently, the application is allowed in part in terms of the order passed above.

¶10

Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court below for its compliance as stated above.

¶11

Order Date :- 5.5.2022 S.Ali

¶12

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.05.05 17:44:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas and 4 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Badera Alias Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Taukeer Alias Kallu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Vs State of U.P. and Another

Onkar Singh Vs State of U.P.and Another

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shabir Ali Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others