Issuance Of Process Must Reflect Application Of Mind, Can't Simply Fill Blank Spaces In Printed Proforma: Jammu & Kashmir High Court
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has deprecated the practice of issuance of process on printed proforma by filling blank spaces.Bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal reasoned that issuance of process is a serious matter and it must reflect the application of mind on the part of the concerned Magistrate though it is not incumbent upon the Magistrate to explicitly state the reasons for...
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has deprecated the practice of issuance of process on printed proforma by filling blank spaces.
Bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal reasoned that issuance of process is a serious matter and it must reflect the application of mind on the part of the concerned Magistrate though it is not incumbent upon the Magistrate to explicitly state the reasons for issuance of process.
It added that failure to do so gives an occasion to the accused to approach the higher courts complaining the non-application of mind by the Magistrate, thereby leading to an avoidable delay in the disposal of the complaint.
The Petitioner had sought quashing of a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the subsequent issuance of process by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pulwama on the ground that the complaint and accompanying affidavit was not signed by the complainant or his counsel. Furthermore, it was contended that the process was issued using a pre-printed format with blank spaces.
Justice Oswal observed that while the absence of signatures on the complaint and affidavit could be considered an irregularity, it was not a fundamental flaw. Citing Indra Kumar Patodia vs. Reliance Industries Limited 2012, the court ruled that a complaint without a signature is maintainable if it has been verified by the complainant and the process has been issued after proper verification.
However, the court took a stern stance on the practice of issuing process using printed proforma. Citing the case "Pepsi Foods Ltd. vs. Special Judicial Magistrate," the court asserted that summoning an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter that demands careful consideration. The court emphasized that the Magistrate must apply their mind to the facts and law relevant to the case, rather than relying on a mechanical procedure.
Based on these observations the bench quashed the issuance of process but upheld the validity of the complaint and sent back the matter to the trial court for further proceedings after the complainant files a properly sworn affidavit.
Also Read: Printed Proforma Not Acceptable: Allahabad High Court Quashes Cognizance Order By Magistrate
Case Title: Sajad Ahmad Mir V/s Mukhtair ul Qadir
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 245
Counsel For Petitioner: Mr. Shahbaz Sikander, Adv.
Counsel For Respondent: Mr. Zahid Hussain Dar, Adv.
Case No: CRM (M) No. 450/2023 CrlM No. 1067/2023