Advocates:
['DILEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA', 'G A', '', 'M J AKHTAR']

Court No. - 88

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6585 of 2021

Applicant :- Ram Prakash @ Ram Prakash Chaudhari

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,M J Akhtar

Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

Heard Sri Dileep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the

applicant, Sri M.J. Akhtar, learned counsel for opposite party

no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the

record.

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant

for quashing the cognizance order dated 06.1.2021 passed by

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padarauna as well as

entire proceedings of Case No.189 of 2021 (State Vs. Ram

Prakash) arising out of Case Crime No.124 of 2020, under

Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506, 452, 188, 269, 308 IPC and

section 51 (b) Disaster Management Act, Police Station

Khadda, District Kushinagar pending in the court of Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padaurana.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that

impugned cognizance/summoning order has been passed on a

printed proforma by filling the blanks and it has been passed

without application of judicial mind and as such, it is not

sustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel for the applicant

has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of

Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in 2009(9) ADJ

page 778.

On the basis of aforesaid judgment, it has been submitted by

learned counsel for the applicant that summoning of accused in

criminal case is a serious matter and the order impugned

reflects that the Magistrate had not applied his judicial mind, as

in the present case the impugned cognizance/summoning order

has been passed on printed proforma, which clearly indicates

that the same has been passed without applying judicial mind

and the learned Magistrate only put his signature at the bottom

of order.

On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that summoning

order has been passed by the learned Magistrate after

considering the material which are available on record, but he

could not dispute the fact that the order taking cognizance has

been passed on the printed proforma.

The present case is finally decided at the admission stage itself

without issuing notice to the opposite party no.2.

From bare perusal of impugned cognizance/summoning order,

it is apparent that it has been passed on a printed proforma by

filling the blanks and it appears that the blanks were filled up by

some staff of the Judicial Magistrate and the Judicial Magistrate

has only put his initial at the bottom of summoning order.

The law on this point is well settled that prior to taking

cognizance and issuing summons to the accused-person, the

Judicial Magistrate has to apply his judicial mind and that the

cognizance/summoning order cannot be passed in a mechanical

manner.

In view of above, since impugned cognizance/summoning order

has been passed on a printed proforma by filling the blanks

without application of judicial mind and as such, it is not

sustainable in the eyes of law.

Accordingly the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is

allowed. The impugned cognizance/summoning order is hereby

quashed.

Learned Judicial Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order

regarding cognizance as well as summoning of the applicant in

the aforesaid case in accordance with law, after applying his

judicial mind within a period of two months from the date of

production of a copy of this order.

Order Date :- 18.8.2021

Tamang