Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78446 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 10102 of 2025 Applicant :- Hari Om Narain Mehrotra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwaini Mishra,Dhruv Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anadi Krishna Narayana,G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. This application has been filed by the applicant - Hari Om Narain Mehrotra to quash the charge Sheet No.4 of 2024 dated 18.11.2024 submitted in Case Crime No. 32 of 2014, under Sections 409, 420, 120-B IPC, Police Station George Town, District Prayagraj and further may please to stay the entire proceedings of the Case No.39 of 2025, State versus Amar Kumar Amar and others, pending in the Court of ACJM-7, Allahabad. 3. At the very outset learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been summoned by order dated 20.1.2025 in a casual and mechanical manner without application of judicial mind. After investigation, the charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 409, 420, 120-B IPC, however, the applicant has been summoned in the all sections mentioned in the FIR without giving any reason for the same. He further submits that the order impugned has been passed without application of mind and is not a speaking order, not disclosing as to why the applicant has been summoned in all the sections of the FIR though the charge sheet has been submitted only under Sections 409, 420, 120-B IPC. He also submits that the applicant is not also named in the FIR. 4. Counsel for the opposite party no.3 submits that no sanction has been given by the Bank to prosecute the applicant and is also supporting the case of the applicant that the allegations as made against the applicant during course of investigation while submitting the charge sheet are false. Thus they are supporting the case of the applicant. 5. Counsel for the State, however, could not dispute the fact that the summoning order has been passed without application of judicial mind. 6. It is settled law that reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. An order without valid reasons cannot be sustained. To give reasons is the rule of natural justice. One of the most important aspect for necessitating to record reason is that it substitutes subjectivity with objectivity. It is well settled that not only the judicial order, but also the administrative order must be supported by reasons recording in it. It is also treated as a part of natural justice and fair play. 7. In the case of Sant Lal Gupta and others v. Modern Cooperative Group Housing Society Limited and others, (2010) 13 SCC 336, the Apex Court has held as under: "27. It is a settled legal proposition that not only administrative but also judicial orders must be supported by reasons recorded in it. ... The reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. It introduces clarity in an order and without the same, the order becomes lifeless. Reasons substitute subjectivity with objectivity. The absence of reasons renders an order indefensible/unsustainable particularly when the order is subject to further challenge before a higher forum. Recording of reasons is the principle of natural justice and every judicial order must be supported by reasons recorded in writing. It ensures transparency and fairness in decision making. The person who is adversely affected must know why his application has been rejected." 8. Applying the aforesaid principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court at the case in hand, I find the impugned order dated 20.1.2025 is completely bereft of the reasons, hence the impugned order is unsustainable. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20.1.2025 along-with consequential proceedings are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the court concerned to pass afresh by speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, preferably within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 9. For the period of two months from today or till pass a fresh summoning order, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case. 10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present 482 Cr.P.C. application is disposed of. Order Date :- 13.5.2025 I.A.Siddiqui Digitally signed by :- IMRAN AHMAD SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad