Allowed

Mohd. Riyaj Alias Riyaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Jul 2024A482/11543/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 application seeking quashing of charge sheet and summoning order in a 304-A IPC case. The court set aside the summoning order as it was passed on a cyclostyled proforma reflecting no application of mind, and remanded for a fresh order.

What did the court decide?

Summoning order dated 02.06.2022 set aside; matter remanded to trial court to pass fresh order within three weeks.

Mohd. Riyaj Alias Riyaj vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:120992

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11543 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Riyaj Alias Riyaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Prakash Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Triveni Saran Rai, learned State counsel and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 has been filed by the applicant- Mohd. Riyaj alias Riyajwith the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 28.5.2021 submitted by Investigating Officer as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 2.6.2022 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No.5, Meerut along with entire proceeding of Case No.7510 of 2022 (State Vs. Mohd. Riyaj) arising out of case crime no.771 of 2020, u/s 279, 337, 338 and 304-A IPC, P.S. Kharkhauda, District Meerut pending before A.C.J.M.Vth, Meerut and further to stay the further criminal proceeding of aforesaid case during the pendency of present application before this Hon'ble Court.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the entire allegations as levelled against the applicants are false and concocted. It is argued that charge sheet in the present matter has been submitted without any cogent evidence. The concerned trial court has passed summoning order on 2.6.2022 which is annexure 2 to the affidavit which is on a printed proforma by filling up the name of the applicant and other details which shows that there is total non application of mind. It is argued that no offence is made out against the applicant.

¶9

Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing.

¶10

Time and again, it has been held that orders of printed proforma cannot be passed and the said system of passing such orders have been deprecated. The summoning order dated 02.06.2022 passed in the present matter is on a cyclostyled proforma in which the details have been filled with ink.

¶11

In the case of Amit Jani vs. State of U.P. and others: (2020) 5 ADJ 1, a Division Bench of this Court has held as follows:-

¶12

"The passing of orders in printed proforma/cyclostyled formats have been deprecated by various High Courts including this court as they do not reflect application of mind. Reference is made to the following judgments:-

¶13

1. 2000 ILR (Kar) 4773, Vijaya Bank Vs. State.

¶14

2. 2010(9) ADJ 594, Abdul Rasheed Vs. State of U.P. & another.

¶15

3. 2009 (67) ACC 532, Ankit Vs. State of U.P. & another.

¶16

4. 2010 (3) ADJ 622, Saurabh Dewana Vs. State of U.P."

¶17

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case as of now, the summoning order dated 02.06.2022 is hereby set aside.

¶18

The present application is allowed to this extent.

¶19

The matter is remanded back to the trial court to pass fresh order in accordance with law within three weeks from today.

¶20

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 29.7.2024 Gaurav Kuls

¶22

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd. Riyaj Alias Riyaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Riyaj Alias Riyaj 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

Mukesh and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Surya Prakash Verma and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Fakharuddin and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinay Kumar Alias Vijay and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Lakshmi Kant Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Varun Tyagi vs State of Up and Another