Allowed

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Feb 2023A482/42919/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge High Court quashed a cognizance order dated 24.12.2018 passed by a Magistrate in a criminal case. The court held that the order was illegal as it was passed on a printed proforma without the Magistrate applying his judicial mind to the evidence on record.

What did the court decide?

Cognizance order dated 24.12.2018 quashed. Lower court directed to pass fresh order regarding cognizance as per law.

Rakesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42919 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rakesh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamal Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opp. party nos. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application has been filed by the applicant for quashing the impugned Charge-sheet No. 98-A/2017, dated 13.09.2017, as well as Cognizance Order dated 24.12.2018, in Case No. 5433 of 2018, "State Versus Dharma Uraw & Others", in Case Crime No. 104 of 2017, under Sections 272, 120-B, I.P.C & Section 60 (2) of U.P. Excise Act, Police Station- Lar, DistrictDeoria.

¶7

At the outset, it is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant the the cognizance order dated 24.12.2018, has been passed on a printing proforma which is against the provisions of law, hence the cognizance order is liable to set aside on this ground alone.

¶8

However, learned counsel for the opp. parties has argued that as the cognizance order has been passed on a printed proforma this alone cannot be a ground for setting aside the cognizance order.

¶9

Though it has been held by this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 that the Magistrate is not required to pass detailed reasoned order at the time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that order of taking cognizance can be passed by filling up the blanks on printed proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order including the order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required to apply its judicial mind and even the order of taking cognizance cannot be passed in mechanical manner. Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Harischandra Prasad Mani and others Vs. State of Jharkhand and another (2007) 15 Supreme Court Cases 494, Fakhruddin Ahmad Vs. State of Uttaranchal and another (2008) 17 Supreme Court Cases 157 and Ankit Vs. State of U.P.

¶10

and others, U.P. Criminal Report 2009 (3) 427 has established that if the order on printed proforma is passed it establishes that the Magistrate concerned has not applied his mind to the evidence on record in order to take cognizance of the offence concerned.

¶11

In the present case also the cognizance order has been passed by the Magistrate concerned on a printed proforma just by putting his initial on the order which clearly shows that the Magistrate concerned has not applied his judicial mind and has not gone through the material collected by the Investigating OfÏcer against the applicant in the case.

¶12

The result is that the order impugned dated 24.12.2018 which has been passed by filling the blanks on the printed proforma is illegal, incorrect and improper, which cannot be sustained. Hence, the cognizance order dated 24.12.2018 is liable to be quashed.

¶13

The cognizance order dated 24.12.2018 is hereby quashed. The lower court is directed to pass a fresh order regarding cognizance as per law.

¶14

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of accordingly.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.2.2023 Vinod.

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Singh 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

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

Ram Swarath Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gagan Rohela and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarvajeet Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Beniwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Panna Lal and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another