THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.11216 of 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') is filed by the petitioners/A1 to A6 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.5068 of 2022 on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. The offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC.
2. Heard. Perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that a private complaint was filed by respondent No.2, pursuant to which, the learned III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad has passed docket order on 08.07.2022 taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC against the petitioners and issued summons to the petitioners.
4. The docket order, dated 08.07.2022, reads as follows:
"Heard gone through the record along with statement of complainant and documents filed. In view of the specific allegations levelled against the accused, prima facie case is made out. Hence, cognizance is taken under Section 420, 406 of IPC against the accused. Issue summons to Respondent/Accused. Call on 23.09.2022."2
5. As seen from the docket order, it is bereft of any reasons as to why cognizance has to be taken against the petitioners. It does not reflect that the learned Magistrate is conversant with the facts of the case.
6. This Court in the common order, dated 28.02.2023 in Criminal Petition Nos.439 and 545 of 2023, quashed the proceedings therein observing that taking cognizance against the accused therein was not in accordance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of i) Sunil Bharti Mittal v. Central Bureau of Investigation 1; ii) Fakhruddin Ahmad v. State of Uttaranchal and another 2 and iii) Deepak Gaba and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh 3.
7. This Court in Criminal Petition Nos.439 and 545 of 2023, held as follows:
"16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court further held that mere assertion "that having perused the record and statements of witnesses prima facie accusation is well founded" as recorded by the learned Magistrate will not meet the requirements of summoning the accused by application of judicious mind.
Time and again, this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has found that summoning a person as accused to face criminal trial is a serious step taken by the criminal Court and such summoning can only be done when the Magistrate finds on the basis of facts that the ingredients of the offence alleged are prima facie made out. For the said reason, cognizance order 1 (2015) 4 Supreme Court Cases 609) 2 (2008) 17 Supreme Court Cases 157 3 (2023 LiveLaw(SC) 3 3 bereft of proper reasoning is liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside."
8. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgments and also the common order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition Nos.439 and 545 of 2023, the impugned docket order, dated 08.07.2022 taking cognizance against the petitioners/A1 to A6 by III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, is hereby set aside.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioners/A1 to A6 in C.C.No.5068 of 2022 on the file of III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, are hereby quashed. However, this order will not preclude the learned Magistrate from taking cognizance by giving adequate reasons.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this criminal petition, shall stand closed.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 15.11.2023 ssp