Ankit Gupta vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 11 October, 2018
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case and on the basis of false and frivolous allegation, the present FIR was lodged against the applicant. He further submitted that there is dispute between opposite party no. 2 and the applicant regarding residential house. He further submitted that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment, the Investigating officer without collecting sufficient evidence submitted charge sheet under section 354 IPC against the applicant. He further submitted that learned Magistrate has not applied his judicial mind while in passing the cognizance order as the order has been made on a printed proforma, in which the name of the accused has been filled up by hand. This Court in the case of Ankit vs. State of U.P. and another, JIC 2010 (1) 432, has held that cognizance order being on a printed proforma is clearly without application of judicial mind and henc is liable to quash on this ground alone.