Harsh Kumar, J. - (1.) Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA today in the Court, is taken on record. The present revision has been filed by accused Raj Kumar against the order ofcognizance and summoning dated 04.05.2010 issued by Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Complaint Case No.520 of 20] 0 (State Vs. Raj Kumar) under section 18/27 Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940.Heard Shri K.K.Dwivedi learned counsel for revisionist, learned AGA and perused the record.
(2.) The only legal point raised by the counsel for revisionist in this revision is that the impugned order of issuing process against complainant has been passed in cyclostyled manner without due application of judicial mind to the facts of the case by learned Magistrate; that the certified copy of impugned order at page 4 shows that the impugned order is on a printed proforma printed with the name of complainant and only spaces of complaint number, date of order, name of accused, police station, sections have been left blank which have been filled at the time of passing the order; that as per averments made in complaint, the recovery of drugs was made from the premises of Sushil Kumar and mere on the contention of Sushil Kumar that he has let out the premises to revisionist and another, complaint has been filed against revisionist and another; that the learned Magistrate without recording any finding about the prima facie evidence of alleged tenancy of applicant over premises in question, has issued process against them; that apart from above, a FIR has also been lodged for the alleged recovery at Case Crime No.154 of 2009 under sections 419,420,274,275,276 IPC 18/27 Drugs and Cosmetics ; Act, 1940; that in the case of Saurabh Dewana Vs. State of U.P.,2010 3 ADJ 622, this Court has held that "passing of such orders on printed proforma by a Judicial Officer/Magistrate, in cyclostyled manner without due application of mind merely, by filling the blanks is very unfortunate"; that in the circumstances, the impugned order is wrong and illegal and is liable to be set aside.
(3.) Per contra, learned AGA supported the impugned order and contended that it is wrong to say that order has been passed without due application of mind.;