A. B. MUKHERJEE, J. ( 1 ) THIS is a composite application under section 197/401 read with section 482 Criminal Procedure Code. ( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner in short is that he purchased a property situated at 58 Muktaram Babu Street, Calcutta. The entire structure was built about 100 years, ago and was in a dilapidated condition. By a Notice dated 19th October 1995, the Calcutta Municipal Corporation (CMC) directed the petitioner to secure and repair the premises by doing, various acts as mentioned in the said Notice. The petitioner after the tenants vacated the premises, started repair work w. e. f. 25th October, 1995, without effecting any change or dimension of this structure. The CMC Authority visited the premises from time to time to see if there was any change of character. After about 2 (two) months, two labourers slipped from the roof of the premises and sustained injuries and First Information Report (FIR) was lodged against the petitioner alleging the change of the nature and character of the structure of the premises. Apprehending arrest the petitioner obtained anticipatory bail. Subsequently, the charge sheet was submitted. The case of the petitioner is that he has not violated any provision of the CMC Act and as such no prosecution lies against him. ( 3 ) THE learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on the basis of the charge sheet in a Stereotyped manner without any application of mind, which will be apparent from the order dated 10th December. 1997 accordingly the present revisional application has been preferred with a view to quash the said proceeding. ( 4 ) I have heard the learned Advocate - representing the petitioner and also with the State. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has taken me through the charge sheet in support of contention that prima facie materials under section 401a of the CMC Act is not in existence and as such no prosecution lies. It is submitted that all the contraventions of the Municipal Laws can not attract the operation of section 401a of the CMC Act, but such construction which endangers or is likely to endanger human life or the property of the corporation viz, Water Supply, Drainage. Sewage-or Road Traffic shall be punishable. It is submitted that all the contraventions of the Municipal Laws can not attract the operation of section 401a of the CMC Act, but such construction which endangers or is likely to endanger human life or the property of the corporation viz, Water Supply, Drainage. Sewage-or Road Traffic shall be punishable. It is argued that in the present case no such facts is pleaded either in the FIR or in the Charge Sheet but at the end to the column 17 of the Charge-sheet, it has simply been mentioned as if the structure caused danger to human life. It is contended that the injury suffered by the men working for the repair of the building cannot come within the purview of section 401a of the CMC Act. ( 5 ) HE has also taken me through the order of the learned ACMM, dated 10th December, 1997 by which the learned Magistrate was pleased to take cognizance of the offence in accordance with section 190 (1) (b) Cr. P. C. He has also drawn my attention to the relevant order and points out that except writing the name of the transferee Magistrate, the learned ACMM has not written a single word in course of the order. ( 6 ) ON the other hand, the learned Advocate appearing for the State drew my attention to the Note in the Charge-sheet mentioning that act of the petitioner was likely to endanger human life. So far as taking the cognizance by the learned ACMM his contention is that it is in accordance with law. I have gone through the statements of witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr. P. C. and it appears from the same that the witnesses spoke about the particular instance when labourers suffered injuries when engaged to repair the building. The ingredient of section 401a of the CMC Act are not satisfied by the said materials as recorded under section 161 Cr. P. C. The said section is applicable only in case when constriction or attempt towards construction is made in, contravention of the provisions of the CMC Act and such construction of the attempt is of such a nature that may endanger or likely to endanger human life. P. C. The said section is applicable only in case when constriction or attempt towards construction is made in, contravention of the provisions of the CMC Act and such construction of the attempt is of such a nature that may endanger or likely to endanger human life. Therefore, there must be something prima facie either in the FIR or as a result of investigation where in the material should be there from which inference can be drawn that particular nature of construction was in violation of CMC Act or rules and such construction or the attempt to construct was likely to endanger human life. The investigating officer cannot produce any such materials as I find from the LCR. ( 7 ) REGARDING the question of taking cognizance it has been stated with in several decisions of this Court as also the Apex Court that taking of cognizance is not a mechanical process and that the learned Magistrate taking cognizance is not simply to give a Stamp on the Charge-sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer himself and as such an opinion. The law requires that there must be some application of Judicial mind by the learned Magistrate in order to come to prima facie finding that an offence in question has been committed. It appears from the relevant order dated 10th December, 1997, that the entire order excepting writing the name of the learned Magistrate to whom the case was transferred, rest were written by the Assistant who produced the record before the learned Magistrate. As a matter of fact even fact of perusal of the Case Diary during taking of cognizance has been written by the same Assistant. It does not require a moments scrutiny to come to the conclusion that there was absolutely total non-application of mind on the part of the learned ACMM in the matter of taking cognizance. In case of perusal of the case diary and statements under section 161 Cr. P. C. which is required for taking cognizance the fact ought to have been written by the learned Magistrate himself and it is not a dictate order since there is no such note at the bottom of the order. This sort of mechanical taking of cognizance makes the solemn duty of taking cognizance a mockery. P. C. which is required for taking cognizance the fact ought to have been written by the learned Magistrate himself and it is not a dictate order since there is no such note at the bottom of the order. This sort of mechanical taking of cognizance makes the solemn duty of taking cognizance a mockery. ( 8 ) AFTER giving my careful consideration to the materials on record, I come to the conclusion that there were no prima facie materials to invoke an offence under section 401a of the CMC Act having regard to the FIR. 161 Cr. P. C. statement and the Charge-sheet. Further cognizance has not been taken in accordance with law. Therefore, it is a fit case in which the revisional court is to exercise the jurisdiction to put an end to the prosecution for which there is absolutely no reasonable basis. Since, the proceeding below has got no merit there is no question of regularising the matter by way of directing the learned ACMM to go in a proper manner in the matter of taking cognizance, the revision application stands allowed on contest and proceeding pending in the court below stands quashed. Petition allowed.