Allowed

Krishna Kumar Bhadana v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 May 2023A482/5928/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a criminal proceeding. The Court held that a summoning order passed on a printed proforma by filling blanks without applying judicial mind was not sustainable in law and quashed the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

The impugned summoning order dated 28.11.2022 is quashed. The Judicial Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order within two months.

Krishna Kumar Bhadana Vs State of U.P. and… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5928 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Bhadana Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Daya Shanker Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Daya Shanker Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing of charge-sheet dated 25.10.2022, summoning order dated 28.11.2022 as well as entire proceeding in Case No. 11886 of 2022(State vs. Krishan Kumar Bhadana) arising out of Case Crime No.1041 of 2021 under Section 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Noida Sector 24, District Gautam Buddh Nagar.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that impugned summoning order dated 28.11.2022 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 .

¶8

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 his judicial mind, as in the present case the impugned cognizance/summoning order has been passed on a printed proforma, which clearly indicates that the same has been passed without applying judicial mind and the learned Magistrate only put his signature at the bottom of order.

¶9

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.

¶10

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

¶11

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 Judicial Magistrate and the Judicial Magistrate has only put his initial at the bottom of summoning order.

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

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

¶15

Learned Judicial 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 his judicial mind within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this order.

¶16

Order Date :- 1.5.2023 P.P.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- POONAM PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Krishna Kumar Bhadana v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar Bhadana 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

Ramendra and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sher Ali and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harendra Saraswat and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Gaurav Kashyap Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Kashyap and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another