Allowed

Shan Mohammadand 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Oct 2023A482/39054/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed to quash non-speaking cognizance and summoning orders. The court found the orders lacked substance and did not demonstrate the lower court applied its judicial mind, quashing them and directing a fresh order.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of cognizance order dated 19.01.2023 and summoning order dated 23.02.2023; direction to pass fresh order within one month.

Shan Mohammadand 2 Others Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:203638

¶2

Court No. - 89

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39054 of 2023 Applicant :- Shan Mohammadand 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raghvendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the cognizance order dated 19.01.2023, summoning order dated 23.02.2023, charge sheet dated 18.09.2022 in Case No.Nil of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.26 of 2022, under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Etah, pending in the Court of JM/Civil Judge (JD)/FTC, Crime against Women, Etah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants have been falsely been implicated in the present case. The summoning and cognizance order is not speaking order and learned Magistrate without applying his judicial mind, summoned the accused person.

¶8

Learned AGA vehemently opposed the submission raised by applicant's counsel.

¶9

Considering the argument raised by counsel for the applicants and perused the record, it is evident from the record that the summoning and cognizance order does not contain any substance which demonstrate that learned Magistrate applied his judicial mind to the facts of the case. Prima facie , the order is not a speaking order, cognizance order dated 19.01.2023, summoning order dated 23.02.2023, charge sheet dated 18.09.2022 in Case No.Nil of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.26 of 2022, under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of DP Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Etah, pending in the Court of JM/Civil Judge (JD)/FTC, Crime against Women, Etah, is hereby quashed.

¶10

It is hereby directed that learned JM/Civil Judge (JD)/FTC, Etah shall pass a fresh order considering material evidence and apply his judicial mind before summoning the applicant, within a period of one month.

¶11

With the aforesaid direction, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands allowed.

¶12

Order Date :- 26.10.2023

¶13

Nitin Verma

¶14

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shan Mohammadand 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shan Mohammadand 2 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Kumar Patel @ Chunna Lal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Radha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Kumar Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lala Ram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Manisha and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Prakash and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another