Court No. - 4
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9298 of 2002 Applicant :- Dr. M.A.W. Razvi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sharad Malviya,Rohan Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant, Dr. M.A Waseem Razvi with the prayer to quash the order dated 15.05.2002 passed by Vth Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, in Case No. 286 of 1999 (Ishrat Qayyum vs. Dr. M.A. Waseem Razvi) by which the applicant has been summoned to face trial for the offences punishable under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 I.P.C.
Briefly stated the facts of this case are that on the basis of First Information Report lodged by opposite party no. 2 against the applicant, Case Crime No. 12 of 1996 under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. was registered against him at P.S.- Bekanganj, District- Kanpur Nagar. The Investigating Officer after completing the investigation submitted final report before the A.C.M.M.-II, Kanpur Nagar. The final report submitted in the matter was challenged by the opposite party No.2 by filing a protest petition before the A.C.M.M.-II, Kanpur Nagar who by the impugned order took cognizance of the offences under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 I.P.C. and summoned the applicant to face trial for the aforesaid offences.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the impugned order dated 15.05.2002 passed by learned A.C.M.M.-II, Kanpur Nagar rejecting the final report and taking cognizance of the offences under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 I.P.C. and summoning the applicant, is a non speaking cryptic order which does not reflect any application of judicial mind by him to the facts of the circumstances of the case and material on record and has been passed in mechanical manner, cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside.
Per contra learned AGA made his submission in support of the impugned order.
Having heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the impugned order as well as other material brought on record, I do not find any force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. It is clearly discernible from the perusal of the impugned order that before passing the same, learned A.C.M.M.-II, Kanpur Nagar had perused not only the protest petition but the other material collected during investigation and thereafter, upon being satisfied that prima facie commission of offences by the applicant under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 I.P.C. was disclosed, he took cognizance of the aforesaid offences and summoned the applicant.
The impugned order in my opinion does not suffer from any illegality or legal infirmity requiring any interference by this court.
This application lacks merits and is accordingly rejected.
Office shall communicate this order to the Court of A.C.M.M.-II, Kanpur Nagar within two weeks.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 Praveen