Ram Bahadur vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 March, 2023
4. The only argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the order dated 10.12.2018 passed by the trial court is a non speaking and cryptic order inasmuch as although the trial court has mentioned in the second paragraph of the said order, the fact of the prosecution and recorded about the statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. of the complainant and his witnesses, then in next para it is stated that perused the trial court record, subsequently in the next paragraph has stated that it has perused the complainant and an offence under Sections 406, 504, 506(2) IPC prima facie is made out and hence there is sufficient ground to summon the applicant and then subsequently passed an order summoning the applicant specific which is non speaking and a cryptic order inasmuch as the Magistrate ought to have got conducted an enquiry in the matter and then stated in detail in the said order as to how an offence under the said sections are made out and then should have proceeded to summon the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon an order dated 28.02.2023 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Application 482 No. 7494 of 2023 (Ishwar Chandra Gupta and 2 others Vs. State of U.P. and another).