HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) Case:- CRM(M) No. 494/2023 Rouf Aslam Shah, age 45, S/o Mohammad Aslam Shah, R/o Umer Colony, Near Masjid Gousia, Lal bazaar, Srinagar. …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Saqib Shabir, Advocate Vs Jamsheed Ahmad Qadri, S/o Mohammad Shafi Qadri, R/o Hubby Colony, Sikh Bagh, Lal Bazar, Srinagar. .…. Respondent(s) Through: None Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER (03.02.2025) 01. The petitioner through the medium of the present petition has challenged impugned order dated 10.06.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Additional Munsiff, Srinagar, whereby process has been issued against him in a complaint filed by the respondent against the petitioner alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. 02. The only ground that has been urged by learned counsel for petitioner for impugning the order passed by the learned trial Magistrate on 10.06.2023 is that the learned Magistrate has recorded the said order on a blank proforma by filling up the blanks, which according to the learned counsel, reflects non-application of mind on the part of the learned trial Magistrate. 03. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned trial Magistrate S. No. 28 2 CRM(M) No. 494/2023 reveals that while issuing process against the petitioner and framing an opinion that offence under Section 138 N. I. Act is made out against the petitioner, a printed proforma containing blank spaces has been used by the learned Magistrate in which blanks have been filled up by the learned Magistrate in his own hand writing/ hand writing of his staff. This clearly reflects non-application of mind on the part of learned trial Magistrate. 04. The Supreme Court and this Court has in various judgments made it clear that issuance of process in a criminal matter is a serious issue and the same cannot be dealt with by a criminal Court in a mechanical manner. Once criminal law is set into motion and a summon/warrant is issued against an accused he faces the threat of being arrested and he has to take steps for procuring bail from the concerned Court. Therefore, before exposing a person to such harsh measures, a criminal Court is expected to apply its mind to the material before it in a careful manner. 05. The fact that the learned Magistrate has used a printed out proforma containing blank spaces while recording the impugned order, goes on to show that the learned Magistrate has not applied his mind to the material before him. May be offences are made out against the petitioner on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint and the material annexed thereto, but it was incumbent upon the learned trial Magistrate to consider and analyze the said material and pass a brief and concise reasoned order before issuing process against the petitioner. Instead of doing so, the learned Magistrate filled up the blank spaces in the already printed out 3 CRM(M) No. 494/2023 proforma, which clearly reflect mechanical functioning on his part. On this ground alone, the impugned order passed by the trial Magistrate becomes unsustainable in law. 06. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the trial Magistrate is set aside. The learned Magistrate shall, however, upon analyzing the material placed before him by the complainant, pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The petition stands disposed of. 07. A Copy of this order be sent to the learned trial Magistrate. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 03.02.2025 Vijay Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No Vijay Kumar 2025.02.06 15.25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Jammu