BABU RAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAVINDRA Singh, J. Heard Sri P. K. Yadav learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned A. G. A.

(2.) THIS petition has been filed against the order dated 05. 03. 2003 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Farrukhabad in Criminal Complaint Case No. 265 of 2003, Shiv Shankar v. Babu Ram and others, taking the cognizance and summoning the petitioners to face the trial for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 504 and 506 I. P. C. and the order dated 9-4-2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad in Criminal Revision No. Nil of 2004.

(3.) FROM the perusal of the order-dated 5-3-2003, it appears that the learned C. J. M. has not given the reference of the allegations made against the petitioners and it is not a reasoned order. It appears that the learned Magistrate has passed this order in a routine and mechanical manner without applying his judicial mind. The learned Magistrate is under obligation to pass a reasoned order mentioning the allegations made against the petitioners, on which he has taken the cognizance, so the impugned order dated 5-3-2003 is illegal. The learned Sessions Judge also did not consider this manifest error committed by the learned Magistrate and dismissed the revision filed by the petitioners on 9-4-2004. Therefore, the impugned order dated 9-4-2004 is also illegal. Consequently, the impugned orders dated 5-3-2003 passed by the learned C. J. M. , Farrukhabad and the order dated 9-4-2004 passed by the Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad are set aside.