Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:179071

Court No. - 84

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3773 of 2023

Appellant :- Ram Vilas Sharma And 2 Others

Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Appellant :- Jadu Nandan Yadav,Arimardan Yadav

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record.

This appeal has been filed to set aside the cognizance/summoning

order dated 06.09.2022 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act,

Kannauj in Sessions Trial No. 802 of 2022 (State Vs. Ram Vilas

Sharma and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 217 of 2022

under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)

द SC/ST Act,

Police Station Kotwali Kannauj, District Kannauj.

It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellants that the

cognizance has been taken on the printed proforma so it cannot be

said that the trial court has applied its judicial mind in passing the

cognizance order. Hence, prayer is made to quash the cognizance

order and the chargesheet.

So far as the argument that the cognizance order has been passed

on a printed proforma is concerned, although it has been held by

this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of

U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 that the Magistrate is not

required to pass detailed reasoned order at the time of taking

cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that order of

taking cognizance can be passed by filling up the blanks on printed

proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order including the

order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required

to apply its judicial mind and even the order of taking cognizance

cannot be passed in mechanical manner. Hon'ble Apex Court in the

cases of Harischandra Prasad Mani and others Vs. State of

Jharkhand and another (2007) 15 Supreme Court Cases 494,

Fakhruddin Ahmad Vs. State of Uttaranchal and another (2008)

17 Supreme Court Cases 157 and Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and

others, U.P. Criminal Report 2009 (3) 427 has established that if

the order on printed proforma is passed it establishes that the

Magistrate concerned has not applied his mind to the evidence on

record in order to take cognizance of the offence concerned.

In the present case also the cognizance order has been passed by

the court concerned on a printed proforma just by filling up the

blanks in the order, which clearly shows that the court concerned

did not apply his judicial mind and did not go through the material

collected by the Investigating Officer against the appellants in the

case.

The result is that the order impugned dated 06.09.2022, which has

been passed by filling the blanks on the printed proforma is illegal,

incorrect and improper, which cannot be sustained. Hence, the

order dated 06.09.2022 is liable to be quashed.

Without going into the merits of the case cognizance/summoning

order dated 06.09.2022 is hereby quashed. The trial court is

directed to pass a fresh order regarding cognizance within one

month as per law.

The appeal is allowed.

Order Date :- 18.9.2023

gp

Digitally signed by :-

GANESH PRAKASH

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad