M/S. Sravanthi Constructions And ... vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 1052 Tel

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1052 Tel
Judgement Date : 2 March, 2023

Telangana High Court

M/S. Sravanthi Constructions And ... vs The State Of Telangana on 2 March, 2023

Bench: K.Surender

           THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

              CRIMINAL PETITION No.1356 OF 2023

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the

petitioners/A2 to A4, A10 and A12 to quash the docket order

dated 10.02.2023 in S.C.SPL.No.26 of 2022 on the file of the

Spl.Judge for Trial of Offences under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-VI

Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1- State.

Perused the record.

3. The petitioner is questioning the docket order dated

10.02.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge which reads as

follows:

"Defacto complainant present. Perused the sworn statement of PW1 to PW3. The prima facie is made out against accused mentioned in the petition. Hence, taken on file against all accused under Sec.120-B, 420, 448, 467, 471, 506 r/w.34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec.3(1) (g) (r) of the SCs and STs (POA) Act, r/w.Sec.82 of the Registration Act. Issue summons to all accused. Call on 06.06.2022."

4. The said cognizance was taken by the learned Sessions

Judge on the basis of a private complaint filed by respondents 2 to

9/complainants under Sections 120 B, 420, 448, 467, 471, 506

r/w.Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code and Sec.3(1) (g) (r) of SC and ST

(POA) Act, 1989 and Section 82 of the Indian Registration Act,

1908.

5. Prima facie, the order of the learned Sessions Jude is

contrary, as law laid down by the Honourabel Supreme Court in

Sunil Bharti Mittal v. Central Bureau of Investigation1, in

Criminal Appeal Nos.34 to 37 of 2015, dated 09.01.2015, wherein

it is held as follows;

"48. Sine Qua Non for taking cognizance of the offence is the application of mind by the Magistrate and his satisfaction that the allegations, if proved, would constitute an offence. It is, therefore, imperative that on a complaint or on a police report, the Magistrate is bound to consider the question as to whether the same discloses commission of an offence and is required to form such an opinion in this respect. When he does so and decides to issue process, he shall be said to have taken cognizance. At the stage of taking cognizance, the only consideration before the Court remains to consider judiciously whether the material on which the prosecution proposes to

(2015) 4 Supreme Court Cases 609

prosecute the accused brings out a prima facie case or not."

6. Further, in the Judgment of Fakhruddin Ahmad v. State of

Uttaranchal2, in Crl.A.No.1408 of 2028 dated 05.09.2008, it is

held that;

"Nevertheless before a Magistrate can be said to have taken cognizance of an offence, it is imperative that he must have taken notice of accusations and applied his mind to allegations made in complaint or in police report or information received from a source other than a police report, as the case may be, and material filed therewith. It is only when the Magistrate applies his mind and is satisfied that allegations, if proved, would constitute an offence and decides to initiate proceedings against the alleged offender, that it can be positively stated that he has taken cognizance of the offence."

7. The issuance of process in a criminal case is a serious issue

and the Court taking cognizance cannot order summonin of the

accused to face criminal trial without giving any reasons. The

order taking cognizance though not required to be elaborate,

should reflect that the concerned Judge had applied his mind to

the facts of the case and had taken cognizance of the offence.

(2008) 17 Supreme Court Cases 157

8. As seen from the cognizance order, there is total non-

application of the mind by the learned Sessions Judge while

taking cognizance of the complaint and issuing process to the

accused to face criminal trial.

9. For the said reason, said docket order dated 10.02.2023 in