Cr. R. No.1216/2008 22.09.2011 The impugned order states in its second paragraph that the matter has been examined and the material accompanying the charge-sheet is sufficient to constitute a prima-facie offence against the accused under Section 306 of I.P.C and, therefore, the charge has been framed. When the parties have been heard and when the accused is contending that it is not a fit case for framing of the charge and that the accused should be discharged, perhaps the only thing is that the Magistrate is required to mention in the order as to what are the relevant acts of omission and commission which are attributable to the accused, which constitute the offence (if necessary after considering the ingredients of the offence), and what is the material in the charge-sheet in support of such facts. No detailed in depth analysis of the material is necessary at that stage. The finding in the impugned order, that the material enclosed with the charge-sheet is sufficient for constituting a prima facie case against the accused, is a conclusion. A judicial order is supposed to contain the reasons for the conclusion also. In these circumstances, this revision is allowed. The impugned order dated 29.5.2008 is quashed. The matter will be reconsidered by the trial Court. In the several criminal revisions which have came before me during the course of past few days, I have found that the subordinate Judicial Officers are frequently committing the same mistake of writing orders containing only similar conclusions as in this case. There in no attention paid to the relevant facts which are required to be considered and mentioned in the orders whether the accused is contending that it is not a fit case for framing all or any of the charges. Therefore, it is directed that a copy of this order be circulated to all Judicial Officers of the State by the Registrar General for their guidance in future. (Sushil Harkauli) Acting Chief Justice snb/-