Santosh Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 983 Jhar

                                       1



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                               ----

Cr.M.P. No. 2925 of 2021

----

Santosh Kumar Gupta, aged about 41 years, son of Suresh Prasad Gupta, resident of Village Bishunpur, PO Nawada, PS Garhwa, District Garhwa, Jharkhand ..... Petitioner

-- Versus --

The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party

----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the State :- Mr. P.D.Agarwal, Advocate

----

4/10.03.2022 This petition has been filed for quashing and setting aside

the order dated 26.10.2016 as well as the entire criminal proceeding and

order dated 07.01.2021 which is the order taking cognizance passed by

learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa in C.No.1396 of 2016, under

sections 27(A)(ii), 27(d), 28 and 28(A) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the order dated

07.01.2021 the learned successor court directed to issue summons. He

submits that in that order it has been recorded that order dated

26.10.2016 was not signed by the P.O. and the cognizance was not there

and looking into that order, he has mechanically issued the same by

order dated 07.01.2021.

Mr. Agarwal, the learned State counsel submits that the

learned counsel has applied his mind and it has disclosed that the earlier

order was not signed.

The Court has perused the order dated 07.01.2021. It is

mentioned in the said order that the order dated 26.10.2016 was not

signed by the then P.O. and the cognizance was not there and

considering this, the summons has been issued by order dated

07.01.2021.

It is well settled that even if the order was dictated in the

Court but it has not been signed and until the judgment is signed and

sealed after which has been delivered in the court it is not a judgment.

Since the order dated 26.10.2016 was not signed that was not the order

of the court. The learned court inspite of that considering that order is

issued the same order. Thus the learned court has not applied his mind in

taking cognizance.

Accordingly, order dated 07.01.2021 by which cognizance

has been taken is set aside.

The matter is remitted back to the concerned court to pass

the fresh order in accordance with law.

Cr.M.P. No. 2925 of 2021 is disposed of.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J)

SI/