Rehan Kabir vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 7535 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 71
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8618 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Rehan Kabir
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Kavish Suhail
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

List revised.

Heard Sri Kavish Suhail, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned State counsel and perused the record.

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Rehan Kabir, with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 10.1.2019 as well as cognizance order dated 17.4.2019 in Case No. 2243 of 2019 (State vs. Rehan Kabir), along with summoning order dated 17.4.2019 passed by the learned C.J.M., Aligarh and bailable warrant dated 27.6.2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 768 of 2016, under Sections 406, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Civil Lines, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of said case along with summoning order and bailable warrants.

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court to the summoning order, the copy of which is annexed at page no. 834 to the paper book. It is argued that the same is on a printed proforma without application of mind. It is argued that from perusal of the order dated 17.4.2019, it is apparent that the same is on a printed proforma in which the Section, Police Station, Case No., name of the accused are kept blank and have been filed by ink along with next date for appearance of the accused whereas all the other contents of the order are previously printed. It is argued that the same clearly demonstrates that there has been total non application of mind by the concerned trial court and the order taking cognizance and summoning the accused is thus bad in the eyes of law.

Learned counsel for the State though opposed the prayer for quashing but could not dispute the fact that the order taking cognizance and summoning the accused dated 17.4.2019 is on a printed proforma with blank spaces of the relevant things which have been filled in ink.

Time and again, it has been held that orders of printed proforma cannot be passed and the said system of passing such orders have been deprecated.

In the case of Amit Jani vs. State of U.P. and others: (2020) 5 ADJ 1, a Division Bench of this Court has held as follows:-

"The passing of orders in printed proforma/cyclostyled formats have been deprecated by various High Courts including this court as they do not reflect application of mind. Reference is made to the following judgments:-

1. 2000 ILR (Kar) 4773, Vijaya Bank Vs. State.

2. 2010(9) ADJ 594, Abdul Rasheed Vs. State of U.P. & another.

3. 2009 (67) ACC 532, Ankit Vs. State of U.P. & another.

4. 2010 (3) ADJ 622, Saurabh Dewana Vs. State of U.P."

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the merits of the case as of now, the order dated 17.4.2019 is hereby set aside.

The present application is allowed to this extent.

The matter is remanded back to the trial court concerned to pass fresh order in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

(Samit Gopal,J.)

Order Date :- 15.3.2023

Naresh