Rajesh Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 20389 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 84
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30044 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Arjit Srivastava,Rajesh Singh,Usha Srivastava,Vinod Kumar Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Bind
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

1. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of charge sheet dated 20.05.2022 as well as cognizanceorder dated 30.07.2022 in Case No. 3254 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 465 of 2021, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506, 352 IPC, Police Station Saurikh, District Kannauj.

2. Learned counsel for applicants submits that impugned summoning order is bereft of any opinion, even in brief, and it is squarely covered by the judgment passed by this Court in Application u/s 482 No.20895 of 2022 (Naresh Singh vs. State of U.P. and another), decided on 24.11.2022, wherein this Court held that:

?The law of cognizance of an offence is that when a police report is submitted before the Court concerned, the Magistrate after going through the police report and contents thereof, if finds sufficient material, he will take cognizance of any offence upon a police report of such facts.

It is not necessary or mandatory that reasons thereof shall be part of order of cognizance. However, when the Magistrate, after taking cognizance of the offence, issues summons under Section 204 Cr.P.C., there is a requirement of an opinion that there are sufficient grounds to proceed against an accused but when the proceedings are in pursuance of a police report, there is no need of any detail order. However, it does not grant liberty to Magistrate to take cognizance and further to issue summon in a routine manner by only filling up certain blanks on a printed proforma.

There is no dispute that district Courts are burdened with work and for that there are some printed proformas also, still there must be details of offence on which the Magistrate took cognizance. It would be better if some application of mind in the form of opinion may be reflected specifically in the order to issue summon.?

3. Learned A.G.A. appearing for State is not able to dispute that summoning order is bereft of any opinion.

4. In view of above, application is allowed. Impugned summoning order dated 30.07.2022 is set aside with liberty to the concerned Trial Court to pass a fresh order considering the observation made hereinabove within seven days from today.

5. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate this Court to Court concerned immediately.

Order Date :- 8.12.2022

AK-(Sl. No. 27 out of 184 fresh cases)