Court No. - 84

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25754 of 2022

Applicant :- Hori Lal

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others

Counsel for Applicant :- Prakhar Saran Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the

State and perused the material available on record.

By means of this application under section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, (in short 'the Cr.P.C.')' order dated

03.02.2022 (annexure no.8) passed by the Additional Sessions

Judge / Special Judge (E.C. Act), Allahabad in Case No. 1587 of

2020 has been sought to be quashed. By the impugned order,

cognizance has been taken on the charge sheet in Case Crime

No. 437 of 2018, under Section 135 Electricity Act, 2003, Police

Station Colonelganj, District Allahabad.

It is inter-alia submitted by learned counsel for the applicant

that the learned Magistrate did not apply his judicial mind at the

time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet and impugned

order of taking cognizance has been passed on printed

proforma, which is not permissible in law. For this submission

attention of the Court has been drawn to the judgement in

Ankit vs. State of U.P. and another, 2009 (3) U.P. Crl.

Rulings 427.

Certified copy of the impugned order of taking cognizance is

paper No. 43, which shows that the said order has been passed

on the printed proforma by filing up the blanks. The blanks on

the printed proforma appear to have been filled by court

employee and the learned Magistrate thereafter put his initial,

which shows non-application of judicial mind in passing the said

order. It is very unfortunate that judicial order of taking

cognizance has been passed by the learned Magistrate by filling

up blanks on printed proforma. This type of order has been held

illegal by this Court in Ankit case (supra). Hence the

impugned order is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.

The learned AGA opposed the submissions but conceded the

factual submissions and further submitted that in event,

cognizance order is found untenable, Court below be directed to

pass afresh order.

This Court in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 39805 of

2017, Manoj Tiwari and 2 others versus State of U.P. and

another, decided on 11.02.2018, recorded its anguish,

directed the Court taking cognizance to pass fresh speaking and

reasoned cognizance order after applying his judicial mind, in a

number of cases this Court set aside the cognizance order being

cryptic and proforma order or the order without application of

mind.

Judicial Officers passing such type of order not only compelled

the accused persons to approach before this Court but also

send message of his incompetence in the society. Passing

cognizance order in such manner erodes the public faith in

judicial system. Passing of order in such a manner must be

deprecated but daily it is being seen that Officer, despite having

notice the order of this Court, is not ready to improve himself in

passing detailed or reasoned cognizance order.

Considering facts of the case and manner in which cognizance

order is passed, legal position discussed herein before, the

application under section 482 Cr.P. C. is allowed. The order

dated 03.02.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge /

Special Judge (E.C. Act), Allahabad in Case No. 1587 of 2020,

arising out of Case Crime No. 437 of 2018, under Section 135

Electricity Act, 2003, Police Station Colonelganj, District

Allahabad is quashed.

Court below is directed to pass a fresh cognizance order after

applying its judicial mind within a period of one month from the

date when order is brought to his notice.

Certified judgement to trial Court forthwith.

Order Date :- 31.8.2022

I.A.Siddiqui

Digitally signed by IMRAN AHMAD

SIDDIQUI

Date: 2022.09.01 13:57:57 IST

Reason:

Location: High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad