IMPORTANT POINT
Judicial orders must reflect application of mind; mechanical summoning orders without reasoning are invalid.

JUDGMENT :

(Shamim Ahmed, J.) :

Heard Shri Rishad Murtaza, the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Hari Shankar Vajpayee, the learned A.G.A.-I for the State-opposite party No. 1 and perused the record.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of summoning order dated 16.1.2023 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1447 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 0310 of 2022, under Sections 376, 313 I.P.C., Police Station Sandila, District Hardoi, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)/F.T.C., Hardoi.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on 5.8.2022 the opposite party No. 2 lodged a First Information Report against the applicant for an incident alleged to have taken place on the same day which was registered as Case Crime No. 0310 of 2022, under Sections 376, 313 I.P.C., Police Station Sandila, District Hardoi.

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the F.I.R. dated 5.8.2022 was lodged by the complainant alleging therein that she is a widow, her husband had died 12 years ago, after the death of her husband accused-applicant, who was posted as Lekhpal at Tehsil Sandila at that time, developed relations with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage and several times made physical relations with her, whenever the complainant told him to marry with her, he always refused to marry with her, the applicant also got aborted her pregnancy forcefully and threatened her for dire consequences.

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

4. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that before arguing the case on merits, he wants to draw the attention of the Court on the charge-sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer and submitted that the Investigating Officer had submitted the charge-sheet against the applicant under Sections 376, 313 I.P.C., whereupon, cognizance was taken by the learned Civil Judge without assigning any reason and summoned the applicant for facing trial. Copy of the same is annexed as Annexure 1 to the affidavit filed in support of the present application.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the learned Civil Judge took cognizance upon the charge-sheet without assigning any reason, which is abused of process of law.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that while taking cognizance upon the charge-sheet the applicant has been summoned mechanically by order dated 16.1.2023 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 below has not taken into consideration the material placed before the trial Court alongwith charge-sheet and, therefore, the trial Court has materially erred in summoning the applicant. The Court below has summoned the applicant through a printed order, which is wholly illegal.

7. It is vehemently urged by learned counsel for the applicants that the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 16.1.2023 is not sustainable in the eye of law, as the same has been passed in mechanical manner without applying the judicial mind, because on the face of record itself it is apparent that impugned summoning order dated 16.1.2023 has been passed by the Civil Judge concerned without assigning any reason, therefore the same is liable to be quashed by this Court.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has given much emphasis that if the cognizance has been taken without assigning any reason on the printed proforma, the same is not sustainable.

9. Per contra, l