Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 108 (0.35 seconds)
Documents citing Mega Nath Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 8 June, 2022

Brijendra Kumar Mishra vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 April, 2026

"10. .....The manner in which the impugned order has been prepared shows that the learned magistrate did not at all apply his judicial mind at the time of passing this order and after the blanks were filled up by some employee of the court, he has put his initial on the seal of the court. This method of passing judicial order is wholly illegal. If for the sake of argument it is assumed that the blanks on the printed proforma were filled up in the handwriting of the learned magistrate, even then the impugned order would be illegal and invalid, because an order of taking cognizance or any other judicial order cannot be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. Although, as held by this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another vs. State of U.P. and another 2008 (62) ACC 826, in which reference has been made to the cases of Deputy Chief Controller Import and Export vs. Roshan Lal Agrawal 2003 (46) ACC 686 (SC), U.P. Pollution Control Board vs. Mohan Meakins AIR 2000 SC 1456 and Kanti Bhadra vs. State of West Bengal 2000 (40) ACC 441 (SC), the magistrate is not required to pass a detailed reasoned order at the time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that such an order can be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order, including an order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required to apply its judicial mind and even such an order cannot be passed in a mechanical manner. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the matter has to be sent back to the court below for passing a fresh order on the charge-sheet after applying judicial mind.
Allahabad High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ramu Alias Sahil vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 April, 2026

"10. .....The manner in which the impugned order has been prepared shows that the learned magistrate did not at all apply his judicial mind at the time of passing this order and after the blanks were filled up by some employee of the court, he has put his initial on the seal of the court. This method of passing judicial order is wholly illegal. If for the sake of argument it is assumed that the blanks on the printed proforma were filled up in the handwriting of the learned magistrate, even then the impugned order would be illegal and invalid, because an order of taking cognizance or any other judicial order cannot be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. Although, as held by this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another vs. State of U.P. and another 2008 (62) ACC 826, in which reference has been made to the cases of Deputy Chief Controller Import and Export vs. Roshan Lal Agrawal 2003 (46) ACC 686 (SC), U.P. Pollution Control Board vs. Mohan Meakins AIR 2000 SC 1456 and Kanti Bhadra vs. State of West Bengal 2000 (40) ACC 441 (SC), the magistrate is not required to pass a detailed reasoned order at the time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that such an order can be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order, including an order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required to apply its judicial mind and even such an order cannot be passed in a mechanical manner. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the matter has to be sent back to the court below for passing a fresh order on the charge-sheet after applying judicial mind.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Raja @ Mohd Alam And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 April, 2026

"10. .....The manner in which the impugned order has been prepared shows that the learned magistrate did not at all apply his judicial mind at the time of passing this order and after the blanks were filled up by some employee of the court, he has put his initial on the seal of the court. This method of passing judicial order is wholly illegal. If for the sake of argument it is assumed that the blanks on the printed proforma were filled up in the handwriting of the learned magistrate, even then the impugned order would be illegal and invalid, because an order of taking cognizance or any other judicial order cannot be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. Although, as held by this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another vs. State of U.P. and another 2008 (62) ACC 826, in which reference has been made to the cases of Deputy Chief Controller Import and Export vs. Roshan Lal Agrawal 2003 (46) ACC 686 (SC), U.P. Pollution Control Board vs. Mohan Meakins AIR 2000 SC 1456 and Kanti Bhadra vs. State of West Bengal 2000 (40) ACC 441 (SC), the magistrate is not required to pass a detailed reasoned order at the time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that such an order can be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order, including an order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required to apply its judicial mind and even such an order cannot be passed in a mechanical manner. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the matter has to be sent back to the court below for passing a fresh order on the charge-sheet after applying judicial mind.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vijay Laxmi Narayan And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 May, 2026

"10. .....The manner in which the impugned order has been prepared shows that the learned magistrate did not at all apply his judicial mind at the time of passing this order and after the blanks were filled up by some employee of the court, he has put his initial on the seal of the court. This method of passing judicial order is wholly illegal. If for the sake of argument it is assumed that the blanks on the printed proforma were filled up in the handwriting of the learned magistrate, even then the impugned order would be illegal and invalid, because an order of taking cognizance or any other judicial order cannot be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. Although, as held by this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another vs. State of U.P. and another 2008 (62) ACC 826, in which reference has been made to the cases of Deputy Chief Controller Import and Export vs. Roshan Lal Agrawal 2003 (46) ACC 686 (SC), U.P. Pollution Control Board vs. Mohan Meakins AIR 2000 SC 1456 and Kanti Bhadra vs. State of West Bengal 2000 (40) ACC 441 (SC), the magistrate is not required to pass a detailed reasoned order at the time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that such an order can be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order, including an order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required to apply its judicial mind and even such an order cannot be passed in a mechanical manner. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the matter has to be sent back to the court below for passing a fresh order on the charge-sheet after applying judicial mind.
Allahabad High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manik Chandra Pal And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 May, 2026

Although, as held by this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another vs. State of U.P. and another 2008 (62) ACC 826, in which reference has been made to the cases of Deputy Chief Controller Import and Export vs. Roshan Lal Agrawal 2003 (46) ACC 686 (SC), U.P. Pollution Control Board vs. Mohan Meakins AIR 2000 SC 1456 and Kanti Bhadra vs. State of West Bengal 2000 (40) ACC 441 (SC), the magistrate is not required to pass a detailed reasoned order at the time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that such an order can be passed by filling up blanks on a printed proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order, including an order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required to apply its judicial mind and even such an order cannot be passed in a mechanical manner. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the matter has to be sent back to the court below for passing a fresh order on the charge-sheet after applying judicial mind. 11........ 12. If approved by the Hon'ble Administrative Committee, let a circular letter be issued by the Registrar General directing all the judicial officers in Uttar Pradesh that printed proforma should not be used in passing judicial orders. 13. The Registrar General is directed to send a copy of this order to Sri Talevar Singh, the then Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur, through the District Judge concerned for his future guidance."
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Prahlad Jaiswal vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 February, 2023

So far as the argument that the cognizance has been taken on a printed proforma is concerned, although it has been held by this Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 that the Magistrate is not required to pass detailed reasoned order at the time of taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, but it does not mean that order of taking cognizance can be passed by filling up the blanks on printed proforma. At the time of passing any judicial order including the order taking cognizance on the charge-sheet, the court is required to apply its judicial mind and even the order of taking cognizance cannot be passed in mechanical manner.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Zafar Khan And 3 Others vs State Of U.P And Another on 4 July, 2022

In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 as well as Single Judge judgment and order passed by this Court in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another [(2009) (9) ADJ 778] on an Application No. 19647 of 2009 filed under Section 482 CrPC on 15.10.2009. He, thus, argues that the summoning order is liable to be set aside in view of the well settled law of this Court. He also placed before me several orders passed by this Court whereby similar orders have been set aside by this Court and the matters have been remanded before the Trial Court for fresh orders in accordance with law.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - G Chowdhary - Full Document

Ranu Yadav vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 July, 2022

In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 as well as Single Judge judgment and order passed by this Court in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another [(2009) (9) ADJ 778] on an Application No. 19647 of 2009 filed under Section 482 CrPC on 15.10.2009. He, thus, argues that the summoning order is liable to be set aside in view of the well settled law of this Court. He also placed before me several orders passed by this Court whereby similar orders have been set aside by this Court and the matters have been remanded before the Trial Court for fresh orders in accordance with law.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - G Chowdhary - Full Document

Gopal Chand vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 July, 2022

In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 as well as Single Judge judgment and order passed by this Court in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another [(2009) (9) ADJ 778] on an Application No. 19647 of 2009 filed under Section 482 CrPC on 15.10.2009. He, thus, argues that the summoning order is liable to be set aside in view of the well settled law of this Court. He also placed before me several orders passed by this Court whereby similar orders have been set aside by this Court and the matters have been remanded before the Trial Court for fresh orders in accordance with law.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - G Chowdhary - Full Document

Kallu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 7 July, 2022

In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Megh Nath Gupta & another Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2008 (62) ACC 826 as well as Single Judge judgment and order passed by this Court in the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P. and another [(2009) (9) ADJ 778] on an Application No. 19647 of 2009 filed under Section 482 CrPC on 15.10.2009. He, thus, argues that the summoning order is liable to be set aside in view of the well settled law of this Court. He also placed before me several orders passed by this Court whereby similar orders have been set aside by this Court and the matters have been remanded before the Trial Court for fresh orders in accordance with law.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - G Chowdhary - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next