Summoning Order Must Reflect That Magistrate Applied His Mind To The Facts & Applicable Law: Allahabad HC
|The Allahabad High Court has held that the summoning order of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and the same must reflect that the Magistrate has applied his mind to the facts and applicable law.
A Single Bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed said, “… the conduct of the judicial officers concerned in passing orders on printed proforma by filling up the blanks without application of judicial mind is objectionable and deserves to be deprecated. The summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and the order must reflect that Magistrate had applied his mind to the facts as well as law applicable thereto, whereas the impugned summoning order was passed in mechanical manner without application of judicial mind.”
The Bench further held that the cognizance/ summoning order passed in the case in hand cannot be legally sustained, as the Civil Judge failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him resulting in a miscarriage of justice.
Advocate Rishad Murtaza appeared for the accused while AGA Hari Shankar Vajpayee appeared for the State.
In this case, an application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. was filed for quashing of summoning order as well as the entire proceeding of a case in connection to the offences under Sections 376 and 313 of the I.P.C pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ F.T.C., Hardoi.
The High Court after hearing the arguments of both parties observed, “… it is explicitly clear that the impugned cognizance/ summoning order passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ F.T.C., Hardoi is cryptic and does not stand the test of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court.”
The Court further directed the Civil Judge to decide afresh the issue for taking cognizance and summoning the accused and passing appropriate orders in accordance with the law, keeping in view the observations made by the High Court and the direction contained in the judgments referred, within a period of three months.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the plea.
Cause Title- Satya Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another