HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30253 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been preferred for quashing of entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 24.06.2019 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 13.02.2020, of Case No. 619 of 2020 (State Vs. Syed Shamshad), arising out of Case Crime No. 210 of 2019, under Section 447 I.P.C., Police Station- Shivkuti, District- Prayagraj, pending before the Court of A.C.J.M., Court No.10, Prayagraj. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant has no knowledge about the impugned proceedings and thus the same could not be challenged well within time. The allegation that applicant has made any construction on the public land is wholly false. It is further submitted that the impugned cognizance / summoning order dated 13.02.2020 is cryptic and mechanical and thus liable to be quashed. In this connection, learned counsel has placed reliance upon case of Salim Khan and 3 others Vs. State of U.P. and another (Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.12286 of 2023), decided on 18.04.2023. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of material on record, a prima-facie case is made out against the applicant. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Jamaluddin Khan, Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Syed Shamshad Alias Shamshad Husan .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. In the instant matter, the cognizance / summoning order is quite cryptic. In that order only it has been mentioned that charge-sheet has been received and the same be registered and summon be issued to the applicant. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that learned Magistrate has perused the record or applied judicial mind. In similar circumstances, summoning order was quashed in case of Salim Khan (supra). Though detailed reasons are not required to be mentioned at the time of summoning in a State case but the summoning order must reflect application of judicial mind, which in the present matter is completely lacking. Thus, the impugned cognizance / summoning order dated 13.02.2020 is not in accordance with law and therefore liable to be quashed. 7. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order dated 13.02.2020, passed by the A.C.J.M., Court No.10, Prayagraj, is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned Magistarate concerned to pass the order on cognizance/ summoning afresh expeditiously in accordance with law. 8. The application u/s 528 BNSS is finally disposed of in above terms. September 9, 2025 'SP'/- NA528 No. 30253 of 2025 2 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad