HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30010 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been preferred for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 13.12.2016 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 22.04.2017, of Case No. 1844 of 2017 (State Vs. Imran), arising out of Case Crime No. 566 of 2016, under Sections - 147, 452, 323, 308, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Tarya Sujan, District - Kushinagar, pending before the Court of Civil Judge, Sr. Division, Kushinagar at Padrauna. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima facie case is made out against them. It was stated that after investigation police have charge-sheeted the applicants for offence under Section - 147, 452, 323, 504, 506 427 I.P.C. and they were exonerated for offence under Section - 308 I.P.C. but despite that learned C.J.M., Kushi Nagar has taken cognizance for offence under Section - 308 I.P.C. besides other sections, vide impugned cognizance / summoning order dated 22.04.2017. It is further submitted that impugned cognizance / summoning order has been passed on a printed proforma by merely filling the details of case like case number, section, crime number Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Imran And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) and police station etc. in the proforma, which clearly shows that this order has been passed in a mechanical manner without application of judicial mind and thus, the impugned cognizance / summoning order is not sustainable. It was also submitted that that in the aforesaid case no notice or warrants have been served upon applicants and they have not appeared before the trial court so far. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application but aforesaid factual position could not be disputed. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. Perusal of record shows that during investigation, Section - 308 I.P.C. was dropped and charge-sheet was filed against applicants for offence under Section - 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. but learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushi Nagar has taken cognizance for offence under Section - 147, 452, 323, 308, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C. Further, the said impugned cognizance / summoning order dated 22.04.2017 has been passed on a printed proforma and merely details of case like name of accused, Sections, Police Station, Crime Number and Next Date of Listing were filled in the said proforma. It is well settled that summoning order has to be passed after considering relevant material and applying judicial mind. In the instant case, it is apparent that the impugned order has been passed in a mechanical way without applying judicial mind. 7. It may be stated that there are hundreds of decisions of this Court to the effect that the summoning order cannot be passed on a printed proforma by merely filling in the details of the case, rather the summoning order must be passed by applying judicial mind. To mention a few cases, reference may be made to the case of Ankit Vs. State of U.P., J.I.C. 2010 (1) 432, Basasudin and others Vs. State of U.P., 2011 (1) JIC 335 All, Abdul Rashid and others Vs. State of U.P., 2010 (3) JIC 7661 All, Surender Kumar & others Vs. State of U.P., 2021 (7) ADJ 61, Virendra Kumar Bajpai Vs. State of U.P. (Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. NA528 No. 30010 of 2025 2 No.7972/2022) and Ram Kewal Vs. State of U.P., 2024:AHC- LKO:5736. 8. It is a matter of concern that despite repeated directions of this Court, summoning orders are being passed by some courts on printed proforma in flagrant violation of law. Summoning of a person as accused is a serious matter and thus, it must reflect the application of judicial mind. 9. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order dated 22.04.2017, passed by the C.J.M., Kushi Nagar, is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court concerned to pass the order on cognizance / summoning afresh expeditiously in accordance with law. 10. The application u/s 528 BNSS is finally disposed of in above terms. September 22, 2025 S Rawat NA528 No. 30010 of 2025 3 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad