Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a cognizance order. While counsel relied on a prior precedent regarding proforma orders, the court found the impugned order was dictated and not merely a proforma, deeming the petition misconceived.
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. - 72
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2794 of 2022
Applicant :- Arif Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Sharma,Amrita Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. Perused the material available on record.
This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding as well as impugned chargesheet dated 14.10.2020 and cognizance dated 2.1.2021 in Criminal Case No. 1540 of 2021 (State Vs. Arif Khan) arising out of Case Crime No. 0217 of 2020, under Section 420 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District- Bareilly, pending in the Court of C.J.M. Bareilly.
Learned counsel contends that the impugned congizance order is on printed proforma. In support of his arguments the learned counsel has placed reliance on the order dated 9.8.2021 of this Court passed in Pankaj Jaiswal Vs. State of U.P. and Another.
However, from the perusal of the impugned cognizance order it is revealed that the C.J.M. has dictated the order which has been typed and only date has been filled up.
Therefore, the present petition is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 12.1.2023 S.Verma
Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a petition under Section 482 CrPC challenging a cognizance order on grounds of mechanical drafting without recitals deserves quashing.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pankaj Jaiswal Vs. State of U.P. and Another.Referred¶8
Pankaj Jaiswal Vs. State of U.P. and Another.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Arif Khan
Umesh Chandra Sharma
Sandeep Kumar Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
