JUDGMENT :

SHAMIM AHMED, J.

1. Heard Sri Rishad Murtaza, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Manoj Singh learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Case No. 1004/2019 pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Faizabad under Sections 427, 188 I.P.C. relating to Crime No. 493/2018, Police Station Pura Kalandar, District Faizabad as well as summoning order dated 02.04.2019 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I Faizabad in Case No. 1004/2019, relating to Crime No. 493/2018, under Sections 427, 188 I.P.C. Police Station Pura Kalandar, District Faizabad.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a First Information Report was registered by opposite party No. 2, Police Station Pura Kalandar, District Faizabad under Sections 504, 506, 427, 447 and 379 I.P.C.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that as per the version of the F.I.R. the informant is pairokar of Sri Laxmi Kant Jhunjhunwala and Sri Prakash Chandra Jhunjhunwal who have land situated at Gata No. 383 and in Gata No. 399 they have 11 Bigha 15 Biswa 5 Dhoor registered in the revenue record and the competent court has directed for its partition. It is also mentioned that informant has made an application to the District Magistrate on whose direction Consolidation Officer and Police people have got pegs fixed on the spot on 17.05.2018 and they had submitted the report to the District Magistrate concerned and the same has been approved and disposed on 11.06.2018. It is further alleged that instead of pegs, cemented pillars 40-45 in numbers, were erected and the accused person along with his 20-25 companions have demolished the aforesaid cemented pillars and carried some to them and when the informant came to know about this incident then he has again given an application for demarcation and upon the direction of District Magistrate a strong med/boundary was created but again the accused persons got it demolished and they also abused and threatened the informant.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the entire prosecution story is false. No such incident took place and the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that before arguing the case on merits, he wants to draw attention of this Court on the charge-sheet dated 31.12.2018 submitted by the Investigating Officer in mechanical manner under Sections 427 and 188 I.P.C. copy of the same is filed as Annexure No. 7 to the affidavit, whereas he further submits that on the charge-sheet, the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance on 02.04.2019. The cognizance was taken on the printed proforma by filling the sections of IPC, dates and number and in the said proforma the learned Magistrate without assigning any reason has summoned the applicant for facing trial. Copy of the cognizance order is also annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the affidavit.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that by the order dated 02.04.2019 cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate on printed proforma without assigning any reason is abuse of process of law and the same was without application of mind and was in a routine manner.

8. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that after submission of charge sheet and cognizance order on printed proforma, the applicant has been summoned mechanically by order dated 02.04.2019 and the court below while summoning the applicant has materially erred and did not follow the dictum of law as propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases that summoning in criminal case is a serious matter and the court below without dwelling into material and visualizing the case on the touch stone of probability should not summon accused person to face criminal trial. It is further submitted that the court belo