1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.PETITION NO.2231/2006 Durgadutt Sharma Vs. State Date of order : 27/10/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Vijayant Nirwan for the petitioner. Shri Peeyush Kumar, P.P. for the State. ****** This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order of cognizance taken against him by learned trial court for offence u/s.306 IPC. The petitioner has also challenged the order by which the revision petition assailing the aforesaid order was dismissed by the learned revisional court. Shri Vijayyant Nirwal, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the learned trial court has taken cognizance against the petitioner without applying the mind and that the order taking cognizance is no order in the eye of law. It is merely a proforma, which was already prepared before and blanks have been filled by the learned court indicating title of the case, sections under which offence was committed and the amount of bail bonds required to be furnished. The learned revisional Court has upheld the said order by a cursory and perfunctory order without considering the arguments made by learned counsel for the 2 petitioner. Learned PP although opposed the revision petition but could not justify how could the learned trial court pass the proforma order and just fill in the blanks and styled that as judicial order. In view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the fact that the learned trial court has not passed any order on its own and merely filled in the blanks in the proforma that was prepared before and has styled the order as order taking cognizance, I find myself unable to sustain such type of order. Consequently, the misc. petition is allowed. The order passed by the learned trial court as well as revisional order are both set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial court for rehearing the same in accordance with law. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/-