Ajay Kumar Singh and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Court No. - 89 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45650 of 2023 Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Singh And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sitaram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶1Counsel for the applicants is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer clause during course of the day..

¶2This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the impugned chalani report dated 07.10.2023 issued by the In-charge Inspector, P.S. Mehnagar, District Azamgarh, under Section 110-G Cr.P.C. and notice dated

16.10.2023 under Section 110/111 Cr.P.C. issued by UP Zila Magistrate Mehnagar, Azamgarh.

¶3It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that impugned order has been passed on a printed proforma by filling the blanks and it has been passed without application of judicial mind and as such, it is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The notice issued by the authority is without following the provision provided in court. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in 2009(9) ADJ page 778.

¶4On the basis of aforesaid judgment, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that summoning of accused in criminal case is a serious matter and the order impugned reflects that the Magistrate had not applied its judicial mind, as in the present case the impugned order has been passed on printed proforma, which clearly indicates that the same has been passed without applying judicial mind and the learned Magistrate only put its signature at the bottom of order.

¶5On the other hand, learned AGA has submitted that order has been passed by the learned Magistrate after considering the material which are available on record, but he could not dispute the fact that the order has been passed on the printed proforma.

¶6The present case is finally decided at the admission stage itself without issuing notice to the opposite party no.2.

¶7From bare perusal of impugned order, it is apparent that it has been passed on a printed proforma by filling the blanks and it appears that the blanks were filled up by some staff of the concerned Magistrate and the concerned Magistrate has only put its initial at the bottom of the order.

¶8The law on this point is well settled that prior to issuing notices to the accused-persons, the concerned Magistrate has to apply its judicial mind and that the order cannot be passed in a mechanical manner.

¶9In view of above, since impugned orders have been passed on a printed proforma by filling the blanks without application of judicial mind and as such, it is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

¶10Accordingly the application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. The impugned order dated 16.10.2023, is hereby, quashed.

¶11The concerned Magistrate is directed to pass a fresh order in the aforesaid case in accordance with law, after applying its judicial mind within a period of one month from the date of production of a copy of this order. Order Date :- 14.12.2023 Meenu Singh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad