Quashed

Mahant Dharmendra Giri Goswami @ Dharmendra Giri v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Sept 2024A482/24967/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court quashed the order of cognizance and remanded the matter to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, finding that the order lacked a date and case number, indicating a non-application of judicial mind. The proceedings were set aside to be heard afresh.

What did the court decide?

The order of taking cognizance by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate was set aside and the matter remanded to pass order afresh.

Mahant Dharmendra Giri Goswami @ Dharmendra Giri vs… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:142588

¶2

Court No. - 82

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24967 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mahant Dharmendra Giri Goswami @ Dharmendra Giri Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Tiwari Abhishek Rajesh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

At the request of learned counsel for the applicant, he is permitted to correct the name of parties during the course of the day.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with prayer to quash the entire proceedings as well as impugned summoning/ cognizance order undated passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura (State Vs. Dharmendra Giri and another) arising out of charge-sheet no. 34 of 2024 dated 22.01.2024 in Case Crime No. 356 of 2023 under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Jait, District-Mathura pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in this case against the applicant Dharmendra Giri charge sheet was filed under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C. and against co-accused Hemant Kumar under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C., but cognizance was taken by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura against both the accused persons under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C. which shows that no judicial mind was applied by the learned court concerned while taking cognizance of the offences. It is also submitted that while passing the order no any date has been mentioned either at the outset or below the signature of the learned Magistrate to show as to on which date this order was passed, even case number was also not mentioned. Therefore, request to setaside the order passed by learned Magistrate for cognizance of offences with entire proceeding of the case.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid, but could not dispute the fact as aforesaid as indicated by learned counsel for the

¶11

applicant.

¶12

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A., perusal of record, the order of cognizance passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura, it appears that the charge sheet was filed against the present applicant under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C. and against co-accused Hemant Kumar under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C., but the cognizance was taken by the learned court against both the accused persons under Sections 420, 406, 506 I.P.C. Even on the order, case number has also not been mentioned and no date has been shown either at the outset of the order or under the signature of the Presiding Officer to show as to on which date the order was passed, which shows non-application of mind of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate while taking cognizance of the offences. Therefore, it cannot sustain in the eyes of law, as a result, the order of taking cognizance by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura is hereby set-aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to pass the order afresh after applying its judicial mind on the basis of material collected during the course of investigation.

¶13

Accordingly, this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶14

Order Date :- 3.9.2024 Sunil Kr. Gupta

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SUNIL KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahant Dharmendra Giri Goswami @ Dharmendra Giri v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahant Dharmendra Giri Goswami @ Dharmendra Giri 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

Naseem Khan vs State of U.P. and Another

Ayesha Khan vs State of Up and Another

Surekha Devi and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Lekhraj and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ausaf Siddiqui and Another vs State of Up