Bachuram @ Bechu Prasad And 3 ... vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 22374 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166894
 
Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28913 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Bachuram @ Bechu Prasad And 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Baranwal
 

 
Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed for quashing summoning order dated 14.09.2022 passed in Case No. 1986/2022 arising out of charge sheet dated 11.08.2022 in Case Crime No. 0306/2022, under sections 323/504/506/308/325, Police Station - Jahanganj, District - Azamgarh.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the FIR has been lodged after a delay of one day of the incident without there being any proper explanation for the same. He further submits that the medical report does not support the prosecution case. He further submits that the Magistrate concerned has passed the summoning order without applying his judicial mind without perusal of the record. He further submits that the Magistrate concerned took cognizance upon the printed proforma and the summoning order itself reflects that only date has been filled up in hand wirting and the name of the alleged accused and sections.

From the perusal of the impugned summoning order dated 14.09.2022 (Annexure No. 5 to the affidavit) shows that the same is in printed proforma. This type of the order has already been held unsustainable by the Apex Court in a number of decisions. This Court in Vishnu Kumar Gupta & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another [2020 (11) ADJ 615] has also taken a similar view.

In view of the above, the conduct of the judicial officers concerned in passing the orders on printed proforma by filling up the blanks without application of judicial mind is objectionable and deserves to be deprecated. The summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and the order must reflect that the Magistrate concerned had applied its mind to the facts as well as law applicable thereto.

In light of the judgment referred to above, the summoning order dated 14.09.2022 passed by Magistrate concerned is cryptic and does not stand the test of the law laid down by the Apex Court. Consequently, the same cannot be legally sustained, as the Magistrate failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him/her resulting in miscarriage of justice.

Accordingly, the present criminal misc. application succeeds and is allowed at the admission stage without issuing notice to the prospective opposite parties, as they have no right to be heard at pre-cognizance stage.

Order dated 14.09.2022 is, hereby, quashed.

The Magistrate concerned is directed to exercise his discretionary power and decide afresh the application for summoning the applicants and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law keeping in view the observations made by this Court as well as the direction contained in the judgment referred to above within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

With the above direction, the application stands allowed..

Order Date :- 18.8.2023

Amit Mishra