The court remands the matter for fresh examination, citing non-application of mind in issuing process against accused.
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has quashed an order issued by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 71st Court, Bandra, Mumbai, in Criminal Case No. 06/SW/2022, citing it lacked judicial consideration. The case involves allegations under Sections 498A, 406, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against Mahavir Singh Charan and others.
The judgment delivered by Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe on March 23, 2026, underscores the necessity for a Magistrate to apply judicial mind while issuing process and not act mechanically. The court noted that the impugned order failed to reflect any judicial consideration of the facts and law, thereby warranting interference.
The dispute stems from matrimonial discord between the Petitioner's son and Respondent No. 2, leading to a divorce case in Mumbai. Respondent No. 2 had filed a complaint alleging harassment, resulting in the Magistrate issuing process under the relevant IPC sections.
Advocate Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, representing the Petitioners, argued that the Magistrate’s order was issued mechanically without examining the facts or documents, rendering it illegal. She urged the High Court to either dismiss the proceedings or assess the case merits in its writ jurisdiction. Conversely, Mr. Rahul Aarote, representing Respondent No. 2, maintained that the Magistrate had applied discretion by limiting the process to specific IPC sections, and if interference was deemed necessary, the matter should be remanded for reconsideration.
The High Court emphasized that the issuance of process is a serious matter that requires the Magistrate to scrutinize allegations and evidence thoroughly. The court referred to several Supreme Court judgments that highlight the importance of applying judicial mind before issuing process, including Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Judicial Magistrate and Mahmood Ul Rehman v. Khazir Mohammad Tunda.
Ultimately, the court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Magistrate for fresh consideration, instructing the Magistrate to carefully assess the case in accordance with legal provisions. The court dismissed the request to substitute its role for that of the Magistrate in evaluating merits for issuance of process, reinforcing the principle of judicial discretion at the initial stage.
The ruling serves as a reminder of the critical role of judicial application in criminal proceedings, ensuring that legal processes are not set into motion without due consideration. The Bombay High Court’s decision reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding legal standards and protecting the rights of all parties involved.
Bottom Line:
Issuance of process by Magistrate must involve application of judicial mind and cannot be done mechanically. An order-issuing process without application of mind is illegal and warrants interference.
Statutory provision(s): Section 190, Section 204, Section 34, Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Mahavir Singh Charan v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc id # 2870720
