The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court while quashing the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur, observed that the use of blank printed proforma for passing the judicial order and that too while passing the summoning order cannot be said to reflect the application of judicial mind while passing summoning order.
A Single Bench of Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I passed this order while hearing an Application under section 482 filed by Virendra Kumar Bajpai.
The application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case under Sections 2 and 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur, pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur as well as the charge sheet dated 06.05.2017 submitted by the Investigating Officer in aforesaid case crime number and the summoning order dated 01.02.2019, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur.
Foremost submission of the counsel for the applicant is that the Magistrate did not apply his judicial mind at the time of passing the summoning order against the applicant because the summoning order has been passed on a printed proforma, which is not permissible under law.
Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant is innocent, who has been falsely implicated in the case. In fact, he is the owner of the possession of the land in question.
His next submission is that the first information report does not disclose any cognizable offence against the applicant and the investigation of the matter was carried out in a routine and casual manner and a charge sheet has been filed against the applicant without collecting credible evidence.
He also submitted that the criminal proceeding is nothing but malicious prosecution and an abuse of process of the Court, therefore, the summoning order is liable to be quashed.
Per contra, AGA has opposed the aforesaid contention of the counsel for the applicant. However, he could not dispute the fact that the summoning order dated 01.02.2019 has been passed on a printed proforma, wherein the name of accused person and date of incident have been filed in the blank spaces.
“It is thus, abundantly clear that the use of blank printed proforma for passing the judicial order and that too while passing the summoning order cannot be said to reflect the application of judicial mind while passing impugned summoning order.
In view of the aforesaid overall facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 01.02.2019, cannot be legally sustained because of non-application of mind which has resulted in miscarriage of justice”, the Court observed.
Consequently, the Court allowed the application under section 482 CrPC and quashed the summoning order dated 01.02.2019, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur.
“The Magistrate concerned is directed to pass a fresh order on the charge-sheet in Criminal Case under Sections 2 and 3 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur in accordance with law.
It is also made clear that in case, the Magistrate again chooses to pass order taking cognizance, the applicant shall have recourse to appropriate remedy, which may be available to him in accordance with law”, the order reads.