Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Allahabad High Court Quashes Cognizance Order Issued on Printed Proforma, Emphasizes Judicial Application of Mind

28 October 2024 1:23 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


High Court underscores the importance of non-mechanical issuance of cognizance orders under Section 190 Cr.P.C.
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has set aside a cognizance order issued by the Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh, citing the mechanical nature of the order which was prepared using a printed proforma. The decision, delivered by Hon’ble Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, highlights the necessity for judicial application of mind in the issuance of such orders to prevent abuse of the judicial process.
The case originated from an FIR filed by Smt. Vidyawati Devi against six individuals, including the applicant Roshan Lal Alias Roshan Rajbhar, alleging offenses under Sections 434 and 506 of the IPC. The allegations pertained to dismantling boundary marks on her property and issuing threats, following a demarcation under Section 24 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006.
Judicial Application of Mind: The court criticized the issuance of the cognizance order on a printed proforma, emphasizing that judicial orders, including those taking cognizance, must reflect a thoughtful consideration of the case materials. “A cognizance order must not be issued mechanically but should demonstrate the Magistrate’s application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case,” stated Justice Rizvi. The court found that the impugned order lacked such judicial scrutiny.
Justice Rizvi reiterated that the process of taking cognizance involves the Magistrate applying their mind to the allegations and evidence presented. Citing several Supreme Court judgments, including Darshan Singh Ram Kishan v. State of Maharashtra and Sunil Bharti Mittal v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the court underscored that cognizance is taken when a Magistrate considers the allegations sufficient to constitute an offense and decides to initiate proceedings.
The court noted, “The use of a printed proforma for passing judicial orders is indicative of non-application of judicial mind and undermines the integrity of the judicial process.”
Justice Rizvi observed, “It is imperative that a Magistrate, when taking cognizance of an offense, must apply their mind to the material on record and ensure that the order reflects a judicious consideration of the case.”
The Allahabad High Court’s decision to quash the cognizance order serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of judicial diligence and the non-mechanical issuance of orders. By setting aside the order, the court has reinforced the principle that judicial processes must be conducted with careful consideration to uphold justice and prevent abuse of the legal system. The Magistrate has been directed to reconsider the charge-sheet and issue a fresh order in accordance with the law.

Date of Decision:7th May 2024
Roshan Lal Alias Roshan Rajbhar And Others vs. State of U.P. and Another

 

Latest Legal News