Disposed

Pintu Kumar Sahani and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Aug 2024A482/25261/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought quashing of proceedings under Sections 323, 325, 308, 504 IPC including charge sheet and cognizance order. The High Court found the cognizance order was passed on a printed proforma without judicial mind and set it aside.

What did the court decide?

Cognizance order dated 12.1.2021 set aside; trial court directed to pass order afresh applying judicial mind.

Pintu Kumar Sahani and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:130028

¶2

Court No. - 82

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25261 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pintu Kumar Sahani And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- R S Dubey,Savita Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

At the request of learned counsel for the applicants, he is permitted to delete the name of opposite party during the course of the day.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application has been filed by the applicants with prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 12004 of 2021 and cognizance order dated 12.1.2021 including charge sheet dated 16.6.2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 173 of 2020, under Sections 323, 325, 308, 504 IPC, Police Station Chiluatal, District Gorakhpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (S.D.)-2nd, Gorakhpur.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in this case, F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants with false allegations of marpeet and offence under Section 308 IPC cannot be said to be made out with material on record even though the Investigating Officer without collecting proper material submitted charge sheet. On the basis of which cognizance was taken on 12.1.2021 by the learned trial court which is on printed proforma which shows that without application of judicial mind, the learned trial court passed the order of cognizance, therefore, request to set aside the order passed by the learned trial court and also the entire proceedings of the case.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the aforesaid prayer but could not dispute the fact that cognizance was taken on printed proforma.

¶11

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, perusal of record, the order passed by the learned trial court on 12.1.2021 for taking cognizance of the offence, it appears that it is on printed

¶12

proforma which is not permissible under law, therefore, it is liable to be set aside. As a result order dated 12.1.2021 for taking cognizance is hereby set aside and learned trial court is directed to pass the order afresh in accordance with law while applying its judicial mind.

¶13

Accordingly, this application is disposed of finally.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.8.2024 Anurag Singh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pintu Kumar Sahani and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pintu Kumar Sahani and 3 Others 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

Abdul Salam and 10 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Avinesh Anihotri and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandan Singh vs State of U.P.

Ameeka Yadav and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another

Doli Kanaujiya and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Somveer Singh vs State of U.P. and Another