New Delhi [India], The District Judge of Saket Court has recently quashed the order framing charges in a rape case passed by the Additional Chi Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM), observing that the order was meaningless. The District Judge also said that the sections under which cognizance of the offense was taken were also not mentioned. The case pertains to allegations of rape and death threats on the pretext of marriage. The order against three persons, including a woman, was passed by the ACMM on February 16, 2024. An FIR was lodged at Saket police station in 2023.After investigation, the police filed a charge sheet, Principal District and Sessions Judge (South) Madhu Gupta quashed the order and sent the case back to Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM). The District Judge said in the order, “A perusal of the impugned order dated 16.02.2024 shows that the learned ACMM has only mentioned that he has taken cognizance, but he has not even mentioned the sections under which cognizance has been taken Has gone." Passed on April 15 The court further said, “It is a settled law that while taking cognizance the court need not consider the merits of the case, but when the case is at the stage of taking cognizance, the court is also required to consider the facts It is necessary to mention in detail the reasons contemplated for taking cognizance of the offence, the case is remanded back to the ACMM with directions to pass a detailed order regarding taking cognizance against the revisionists or the accused person. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case of the offenses of which cognizance has been taken, the accused persons have been directed to appear before the ACMM on May 7, 2024. This order was challenged by Gautam Kumar, Isha and Abhishek on this ground.The said order was cryptic and even voice samples were not collected by the investigating officer as is clear from the order dated February 16 and it is a non-speaking order. Gautam Kumar and the accused had become friends through Bumble dating app. The lawyer argued that revisionist Gautam Kumar, who was working as Ahlmad in the trial court, has now been removed from service as he remained behind the bars for more than 48 hours. Career ruined. It was also argued that no material has been placed on record to establish the basis of the allegations made by the complainant.It was further stated that the ACMM order was put on charge in a routine and automatic manner, lacking detailed deliberations. The learned ACMM failed to provide rationale, demonstrated lack of judicial application and passed orders in a hurry and even failed. Specifying the offenses for which cognizance was taken. The accused had argued that this order should be cancelled.