Allahabad High Court
Nidhi Patel vs State Of U.P. on 29 July, 2022
Bench: Rajendra Kumar-Iv
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Reserved on 04.04.2022
Delivered on 29.07.2022
In Chamber
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29932 of 2021
Applicant :- Nidhi Patel
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard learned Counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State and perused the material available on record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant to quash the entire charge sheet dated 01.09.2020 as well as summoning order dated 30.06.2021 passed in Case No.10721 of 2021, (State versus Pradyumn Sharma), Case Crime No.647 of 2020, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity. She has committed no offence. Prosecution story is false and fake. Applicant is not named in the FIR, her name came into light during course of investigation on the statement of co-accused Amit @ Ankit Patel (brother of applicant) under Section 161 Cr.P.C.. Applicant is owner of the alleged vehicle and she has no concern with the present case. Due to present case her further process for selection has been stopped by the department. It is further submitted that applicant due to matrimonial dispute, is living with her parental house. He showed some papers as well as statements in support of his contention and relied upon the judgment reported in 2008 (10) ADJ 85, Ashfaq Ahmad and another versus State of U.P. and another. Learned Counsel contends that no offence, as alleged, is made out.
Learned Counsel further confines his argument in respect of cognizance order on the ground that it is vague and it has been passed without application of mind and it is not a reasoned order. Magistrate has not affirmed any opinion whether the offence alleged is made out or not. Cognizance order is such order which prejudice valuable right of the accused it should be well discussed. 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.
Per contra learned AGA vehemently opposed the application and submitted that accused-applicant committed offence under the alleged sections and from the allegations made in the FIR and statements of witnesses prima-facie case is made out. Her name has come into light on the statement of her real brother thus there appears no reason to falsely implicated her. He further submitted that entire submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant is on fact of the case which cannot be adjudicated at this stage under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Truthfulness of allegation and statement of witnesses can be adjudicated only after the evidence is produced in the trial court. But learned AGA conceded that cognizance order is non speaking order.
Certified copy of the order of taking cognizance is paper No. 37, which shows that the said order has been passed mechanically. Order speaks that charge sheet has been filed. Perused the case diary, cognizance taken, order does not contain any details, it reflects non judicial mind. The order appear to have been written by some court employee with hand writing 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 mechanically. 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.
Recently 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 compel 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 in passing detailed or reasoned cognizance order.
Consequently, the application under section 482 Cr.P. C. is allowed. The impugned cognizance order dated 30.06.2021 passed in Case No.10721 of 2021, (State versus Pradyumn Sharma), arising out of charge sheet in Case Crime No.647 of 2020, Police Station Cantt., District Varanasi is hereby quashed.
Learned Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh reasoned and speaking cognizance order within a period of two months from the date, when order is brought to his notice, after applying its judicial mind.
Certify this order to Magistrate concerned for compliance forthwith.
Order Date :- 29.07.2022
I.A.Siddiqui
