The Magistrate Issued Process Anyway. That Was No Application Of Mind.
A complaint said the documents were forged and fabricated. There was nothing cogent to show it, and the order sending two men to trial has been set aside.
The Court held that in the absence of any cogent, credible and unimpeachable evidence, no prosecution under Section 463, punishable under Section 465, could be initiated against the petitioners. The order directing issuance of process clearly reflects total non-application of judicial mind, is wholly unsustainable in the eyes of law, and was quashed along with all criminal proceedings arising from the complaint against them.
- Forgery needs proof, not assertion. The standard the Court used was cogent, credible and unimpeachable evidence.
- Issuing process is a judicial act, and doing it without material is non-application of mind.
- Sections 463 and 465 — the offence and its punishment — could not be attracted on this record.
- Everything flowing from the complaint went, not only the order of process.
- Court
- High Court of Judicature at Patna
- Bench
- Justice MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH
- Citation
- Criminal Miscellaneous No. 53275 of 2016
- Case
- Criminal Miscellaneous No. 53275 of 2016
- Decided
- 3 September 2026
- Outcome
- Application allowed; order issuing process and all proceedings quashed
What the complaint asserted
The complaint proceeded on the footing that the documents in question are forged and fabricated and therefore not legally enforceable.
Why that could not sustain a prosecution
In the absence of any cogent, credible and unimpeachable evidence, no prosecution under Section 463 of the Penal Code — for which punishment is provided by Section 465 — could be initiated against the petitioners.
On the factual and legal analysis, the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate directing issuance of process against the petitioners to face trial clearly reflects total non-application of judicial mind.
The order was accordingly held wholly unsustainable in the eyes of law and quashed and set aside, and consequently all criminal proceedings emanating from the complaint case, so far as they concern the petitioners, were quashed as well.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Can a court issue process on a bare allegation of forgery?
No. Without cogent, credible and unimpeachable evidence, no prosecution under Section 463 could be initiated.
What is non-application of judicial mind?
Passing an order without considering whether the material discloses the offence. It made this summoning order unsustainable.
Challenging an order issuing process
- Ask what material the Magistrate had before him, and put the absence of it at the front of the petition.
- Where forgery is alleged, require the complainant to point to the evidence, not to the conclusion.
- Frame the ground as non-application of judicial mind, which goes to the order itself rather than the merits.
- Ask for the consequential proceedings to be quashed along with the order, or the case survives it.
Source. High Court of Judicature at Patna, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 53275 of 2016, decided 3 September 2026 by Justice MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH. This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.
Claw tracks High Court of Judicature at Patna and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in