Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Summoning of an Accused on Printed Proforma Without Assigning Any Reason Is an Abuse of Process of Law: Allahabad High Court Quashes Cognizance and Summoning Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has quashed the cognizance and summoning order concerning FIR No. 321/2014 under various IPC sections, including Sections 406, 323, 504, 506, 34. The order was challenged for being issued on a printed proforma without proper judicial reasoning, highlighting a crucial issue of judicial application in criminal procedures.

Facts and Issues of the Case: The applicant, Mohd. Suhail, through his counsel, contended that the order dated 11.05.2015 lacked application of judicial mind as the Magistrate had failed to mention under which sections the chargesheet had been filed and only took cognizance against a co-accused, completely omitting the applicant’s involvement at this stage. This led to harassment by the police despite the applicant not being summoned to court, thereby constituting an abuse of legal process.

Non-application of Judicial Mind: The court noted that the Magistrate’s order was passed using a printed proforma, filled in cursorily without adequate consideration of the charges against the applicant. This method was deemed contrary to the requirement of judicious scrutiny expected in judicial processes.

Legal Precedents and Principles: The judgment drew heavily on precedents which underscored the necessity of a reasoned approach in the summoning process. Cases such as Bhushan Kumar & Anr. V. State (NCT of Delhi) and others were cited where the courts held that summoning an accused is a serious judicial function that requires clear grounds based on the material presented.

Violation of Right to Fair Investigation and Trial: The decision highlighted that a fair and proper investigation is a part of the constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which includes all judicial processes. The court emphasized the importance of a magistrate’s duty to meticulously review the allegations and evidence before taking cognizance.

Decision: The Court allowed the application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., quashing the cognizance and summoning order dated 11.05.2015. It was directed that the matter be reconsidered afresh, ensuring that judicial norms and proper reasoning are applied in accordance with law and the observations of the court.

Date of Decision: 2nd April 2024

MOHD. SUHAIL Vs. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME, CIVIL SECTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER

 

Latest Legal News