JUDGMENT : This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard. 2. Heard the counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.9.2019 by which, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag, has taken cognizance for the offence under Section(s) 419, 420, 120B IPC, Section 41 of the Medical Practice Act, 2007 and Section 15(3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and issued summon against the petitioner in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 300/2018 (G.R. No. 1571 of 2018). 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order impugned is cryptic and it does not suggest application of mind. He further submits that requirement of Section 204 Cr.P.C. has not been dealt with in the order impugned. He also submits that the court should have sufficiently satisfied itself before issuing process against the accused. He further submits that what are the materials for taking the cognizance, has not been reflected in the order impugned, which makes the impugned order defective. 5. Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer of the petitioner but after going through the order impugned, he cannot justify the order impugned. 6. After going through the record and the order impugned, I find that the court below has taken cognizance for the offence under Section(s) 419, 420, 120B IPC, Section 41 of the Medical Practice Act, 2007 and Section 15(3) of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 and thereafter the summons have been issued. What are the materials against the petitioner which warrants issuance of summon, has not been mentioned in the order impugned. In most mechanical way, the composite orders i.e. the order taking cognizance and the order issuing summons have been passed. This Court in the case of Amresh Kumar Dhiraj and Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Another, reported in 2020 (1) JLJR 199 (Jhr.) has passed the detailed order discussing the provisions of Sections 190 and 204 Cr.P.C. The impugned order is not in consonance with the aforesaid order. 7. This Court in the case of Amresh Kumar Dhiraj and Ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and Another, reported in 2020 (1) JLJR 199 (Jhr.) has passed the detailed order discussing the provisions of Sections 190 and 204 Cr.P.C. The impugned order is not in consonance with the aforesaid order. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts, I find that order dated 17.9.2019 is not in consonance with the provisions as laid down under Sections 190 and 204 Cr.P.C. Thus, order impugned is, hereby, quashed and set aside. 8. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. 9. The learned court below is directed to pass order afresh in accordance with the provisions of law.