Mechanical cognizance order without judicial mind led to quashing of criminal proceedings based on offences not disclosed in the complaint.

Cognizance must be taken on the offences actually disclosed in the complaint and only after application of judicial mind; a mechanical printed order is invalid. Here, the complaint alleged defamation, threat and assault, but the Magistrate first recorded cognizance as if the matter fell under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the transferee court later issued process under sections not reflected in the complaint. As the orders did not show proper application of mind and proceeded on a basis not disclosed in the complaint, the criminal proceeding was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal proceeding and the order taking cognizance were liable to be quashed for want of application of judicial mind and for proceeding on a basis not disclosed in the complaint.

Analysis: The complaint disclosed allegations of defamation, threat, and assault, but the Magistrate's first order recorded cognizance as if the matter were under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, despite the complaint being presented on allegations under Sections 500 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. The transferee court thereafter issued process under Sections 323, 498A, 500, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The order did not show that the Magistrate had applied his mind to the complaint before taking cognizance, and the printed form order was filled in mechanically. Since cognizance must be of the offence disclosed in the complaint and not in a casual or mechanical manner, the initiation of the proceeding was held to be illegal.

Conclusion: The proceeding was quashed. The petitioner succeeded.

---