Allowed

Ashok Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2023A482/40965/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a cognizance and summoning order dated 09.11.2020. The order was passed mechanically on a printed proforma without the required application of judicial mind, rendering it unsustainable in law.

What did the court decide?

Impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 09.11.2020 quashed. Magistrate directed to pass fresh order after applying judicial mind within one month.

Ashok Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:212545

¶2

Court No. - 89

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40965 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ashok Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2120 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.49 of 2019, under Sections 406, 504 IPC, Police Station- Sikriganj, DistrictGorakhpur as well as charge sheet dated 12.08.2019, cognizance order dated 09.11.2020, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate -II, Gorakhpur.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that impugned cognizance/summoning order has been passed on a printed proforma by filling the blanks and it has been passed without application of judicial mind and as such, it is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in 2009(9) ADJ page 778.

¶9

On the basis of aforesaid judgment, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that summoning of accused in criminal case is a serious matter and the order impugned reflects that the Magistrate had not applied its judicial mind, as in the present case the impugned cognizance/summoning order has been passed on printed proforma, which clearly indicates that the same has been passed without applying judicial mind and the learned Magistrate only put its signature at the bottom of order.

¶10

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that summoning order has been passed by the learned Magistrate after considering the material which are available on record, but he could not dispute the fact that the order taking cognizance has been passed on the printed proforma.

¶11

The present case is finally decided at the admission stage itself without issuing notice to the opposite party no.2.

¶12

From bare perusal of impugned cognizance/summoning order, it is apparent that it has been passed on a printed proforma by filling the blanks and it appears that the blanks were filled up by some staff of the concerned Magistrate and the concerned Magistrate has only put its initial at the bottom of summoning order.

¶13

The law on this point is well settled that prior to taking cognizance and issuing summons to the accused-persons, the concerned Magistrate has to apply its judicial mind and that the cognizance/summoning order cannot be passed in a mechanical manner.

¶14

In view of above, since impugned cognizance/summoning order has been passed on a printed proforma by filling the blanks without application of judicial mind and as such, it is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

¶15

Accordingly the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed . The impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 09.11.2020 is hereby quashed.

¶16

The concerned Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order regarding cognizance as well as summoning of the applicant in the aforesaid case in accordance with law, after applying its judicial mind within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this order.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.11.2023 Nitin Verma

¶18

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

Ashok Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Yadav 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

Sumita Negi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manish Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohan Lal Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramchet and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aurangjeb Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Umar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another