- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
(2.) This criminal revision has been filed against the order dated 31.3.2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Kalpi, District - Jalaun in Case No. 471 of 2016 (State Vs. Satish Chandra & others) whereby learned Magistrate took cognizance on the chargesheet filed by Police Station - Churkhi, District - Jalaun.
(3.) Brief facts of the case are as follows: It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that learned Magistrate has not applied his mind before taking the cognizance and in the context, it is also submitted that on printed proforma, fillings are being made by the office of the learned magistrate and learned magistrate put his short signatures upon that. Learned AGA argued that there is no set pattern for taking the cognizance on the police report and in this case learned magistrate has applied his mind as is clear from the order dated 31.3.2016 in which it has been written that the matter has been perused.;