Order : This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 22.05.2015 passed by A.C.J.M, Jamtara in connection with Kundahit P.S. Case No. 12 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No. 218 of 2015, whereby cognizance has been taken for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the I.P.C. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that on completion of investigation police had submitted charge-sheet against only eight persons and had shown these petitioners as not sent up. It is argued that the trial Court has not assigned any reason for differing from the material evidence collected as mentioned in the case diary by the police during investigation. That even if the F.I.R is presumed to be true then there is no overt act alleged against these petitioners, save and except that they were seen fleeing away from the place of occurrence. That the independent witnesses have not stated about the presence of the petitioners and the court below, without appreciating the materials on record and without assigning any reason, has taken cognizance and issued notices to the petitioners to face the trial. On the above grounds, it is submitted that the impugned order is not in consonance with the settled proposition of law and is fit to be set aside. 3. Learned A.P.P has opposed and submitted that the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has considered and appreciated the statement of the witnesses recorded in paras 6, 16, 25 and 46 of the case diary. They have been named by the informant. It is submitted that at the stage of cognizance the Magistrate has only to record his satisfaction on the basis of materials on record. The learned Magistrate has applied his judicial mind to the materials on record in forming an opinion that prima facie case is made out for taking cognizance of the offence and proceeding against the petitioners. 4. Heard. Perused the impugned order. The informant has stated that she had seen the petitioners fleeing away from the place of occurrence and the trial Court has considered the statement of the witnesses recorded in paras 6, 16, 25 and 46 of the case diary. It is well settled that at the stage of taking cognizance the Magistrate is not required to analyse all the materials including pros and cons, reliability or acceptability thereof. It is well settled that at the stage of taking cognizance the Magistrate is not required to analyse all the materials including pros and cons, reliability or acceptability thereof. The Court is not required to act as a post office by accepting the report of the police as a gospel truth, what is needed is independent application of judicial mind to materials on record. It is evident that the learned Magistrate has recorded his satisfaction for taking cognizance on the basis of materials on record. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel is a subject matter which can be appreciated when evidence is led during trial and not at this juncture. 5. The petitioners are always at liberty to place the point in their defence in the court below and the court below shall consider the same and pass necessary order without being prejudiced by any discussion or observation made hereinabove. 6. In the result, the Cr.M.P is hereby dismissed.