Summoning order requires application of mind; suppression of material facts can justify quashing of criminal prosecution.

A summoning order in criminal proceedings must show application of mind and a reasoned satisfaction that the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are prima facie made out. Where the order contains only a bare assertion of prima facie case, and the complaint and protest petition suppress material facts about earlier proceedings and the status of the property dispute, continuation of prosecution is impermissible. The note further states that, where the complainant society itself had resolved that the earlier secretary lacked authority to prosecute and did not wish to continue, the cognizance and summons order was unsustainable and the criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the cognizance and summons order could be sustained where the order reflected no application of mind and the complaint and protest petition suppressed material facts, warranting quashing of the criminal proceedings.

Analysis: The complaint was followed by police investigation and a final report stating that the dispute was civil in nature. The protest petition was entertained and cognizance was taken, but the order contained only a bare assertion that a prima facie case existed, without indicating the factual basis for summoning the accused. The record also showed that material circumstances relating to the earlier proceedings concerning the allottee, the litigation in the High Court, and the registration of the property pursuant to those directions were not disclosed in the complaint or protest petition. In such circumstances, the continuation of criminal prosecution was held to be impermissible, especially where the complainant society itself had resolved that the earlier secretary lacked authority to prosecute and did not wish to continue the proceedings.

Conclusion: The cognizance and summons order was unsustainable and the criminal proceedings were liable to be quashed in favour of the petitioners.

Final Conclusion: The criminal petitions succeeded and the prosecution arising from the challenged complaint could not be continued.

Ratio Decidendi: A summoning order must disclose application of mind and a reasoned satisfaction that the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are prima facie made out; suppression of material facts may justify quashing of the criminal proceedings.

---