Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81429 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16312 of 2025 Applicant :- Maheshwar Pratap Shahi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Singh,Parijat Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohit Singh along with Sri Parijat Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri J.P. Gupta, learned AGA for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred for quashing the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 20.09.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Complaint Case No.22176/2024 (State of U.P. through Range Forest Officer Vs. Ramesh Kumar Singh and another) under section 4/10 of the U.P Tree Protection Act, 1976 (as amended in 2011) and also to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.22176/2024 (State of U.P. through Range Forest Officer Vs. Ramesh Kumar Singh and another) under section 4/10 of the U.P Tree Protection Act, 1976 (as amended in 2011), pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padrauna. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint stood lodged by the opposite party no. 2 against the applicant and one another, under Section 4/10 of the UP Protection of Trees Act, 1976 as amended in the year 2011, wherein it has been alleged that on the basis of a complaint so lodged in the IGRS Portal on 16.05.2024 at 12:10 P.M., an inspection was conducted wherein, 8 trees of Uko Lyptus, two trees of Jamun and three trees of Sagwan were found on the floor as they have been cut down. Thereafter, on 20.09.2024, the applicant has been summoned by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Complaint Case No. 22176 of 2024 (Forest Department Vs. Rakesh Kumar Singh and others). 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there are several grounds on which the summoning order dated 20.09.2024 as well as the merits of the complaint is prone to be challenged but according to him, the fundamental defect is that the summoning order has been passed by total non application of mind without any reasoning or even reciting the case of the complainant. He, thus, submits that the order summoning be set aside, matter is remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh summoning order. 5. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that he is well versed with the facts of the case and according to him since the summoning order appears to have been passed in a cryptic manner, thus, the same be set aside, matter be remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. 7. Apparently, a complaint stood lodged by the opposite party no. 2 on 19.09.2024 under the provisions of Section 4/10 of the U.P. Protection of Trees Act and on 20.09.2024 the applicant was summoned the order whereof is quoted hereinunder.- " आज यह चललनन ररपपरर पररवलद वन ववभलग सस पलप हहआ। दजर रजजसरर हप। अवभययक जररयस सममन वदनलनक 21-10-2024 कप पसश हप।" 8. A perusal of the summoning order passed dated 20.09.2024 passed by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padrauna reveals that the same is non speaking unreasoned cryptic in nature and the same has been passed even without reciting the case of the complainant so as to show that there has been a prima facie satisfaction on the part of the Magistrate. M/s. JM Laboratories vs State of Andhra Pradesh 2025 INSC 127, confronted with the summoning orders of such type, wherein it was observed as under.- "9. In the present case also, no reasons even for the namesake have been assigned by the learned Magistrate. The summoning order is totally a non- speaking one. We therefore find that in light of the view taken by us in criminal appeal arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2345 of 2024 titled "INOX Air Products Limited Now Known as INOX Air Products Private Limited and Another v. The State of Andhra Pradesh", and the legal position as has been laid down by this Court in a catena of judgments including in the cases of Pepsi Foods Ltd. and another Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and others, Sunil Bharti Mittal Vs. Central Central Bureau of Investigation, Mehmood U Rehman Vs. Khazir Mohammad Tunda and others and Krishna Lal Chawla and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, the present appeal deserves to be allowed." 9. Since, the summoning is not as per the mandate of the law in the judgments in M/s. JM Laboratories (supra), the summoning order dated 20.09.2024 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Complaint Case No. 22176 of 2024, under Section 4/10 of the UP Protection of Trees Act, 1976 is set aside, the matter stands remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law. 10. For facilitation, the certified copy of the order passed today shall be furnished to the court below by 30.05.2025 by the applicant as well as by the learned Standing Counsel. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad