AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon''ble Chief Justice Prakash Tatia, C J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order to take cognizance dated 22.12.2009 has been passed mechanically without application of mind and without considering any fact of the case. It is further submitted that even cognizance has been taken for committing offence under Sections 2/3 of the Avaidh Utkhanan Act, which is not in existence.
This Court directed the State to make it clear whether there is any Act named as ''Avaidh Utkhanan Act'' or not and learned counsel for the State submitted that there is no such Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that even for offence u/s 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code, the Trial Court has not applied its mind so far the case of this writ petition is concerned.
Since the order has been passed mechanically without application of mind, which is apparent from the error apparent on the fact of it. Therefore, the order dated 22.12.2009 is set aside. However, it is made clear that this Court has not observed anything whether any cognizance is required to be taken for commission of offence u/s 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code or not and that too against the writ petitioner, which is required to be taken independently by the Trial Court in accordance with law and after hearing the parties.
For the above reasons, the trial for the offence u/s 2/3 of the Avaidh Utkhanan Act, which is not in existence is dropped. The writ petition is allowed to that extent. The writ petitioner may appear before the Trial Court on the next date.