K.N. PHANEENDRA, J.

1. Petitioners in Crl. R.P. No. 1068/2017 are Accused Nos. 4 to 6 and the petitioners in Crl. R.P. No. 1156/2017 are Accused Nos. 1 to 3 in SC No. 472/2015 pending on the file of the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge at Bengaluru City,

2. The above said two revision petitions are arising out of a common order dated 28.08.2017 in SC No. 472/2015 passed by the trial Court, on the application filed by the accused persons under Section 227 of Cr.P.C.

3. The records disclose that, the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the application in SC No. 472/2015 under Section 227 of Cr.PC. The respondent-Police have laid the charge sheet against as many as six accused persons in C.C. No. 34321/2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 498-A, 420, 504, 506, 201, 120(B) of IPC and after committal, the case has been registered before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, in SC No. 472/2015.

4. Accused Nos. 1 to 6, who are the petitioners in the above said two criminal petitions have filed an application under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. for their discharge from the above said offences. The application contains various grounds urged by the petitioners. The said application was contested by the State by filing objections countering the grounds made there in the application. The trial Court has dismissed the said application even without whispering as to what are the prima facie materials available on record. The order which is in the manuscript of the learned Sessions Judge is also not readable in nature. In various decisions of this Court it is made amply clear that, if the handwriting of the Judicial Officer is not properly understandable, then the order should be got typed and thereafter it should be pronounced. In this particular case, as could be seen, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is not even readable and more over with great difficulty, this court has read the order of the trial Court, which is bereft of any reasons, as the learned Sessions Judge has not even spelt out as to what are the materials he has perused; what are the contents of the materials and as to how and why the learned Sessions Judge has come to the conclusion that there are grounds to proceed against the accused persons. In this regard, it is worth to reproduce the provision of Section 227 of Cr.P.C. which reads as under:-

227. Discharge.- If, upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith, and after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution in this behalf, the Judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for so doing.

5. In view of the above provision, it is incumbent upon the learned Judge to find-out whether there are any sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused. The Court has to say as to what are all the materials available and examined by the court and what are the submissions made by the parties and what material is available for consideration of the trial Court. Therefore, it is not and idle formality to pass order mechanically under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. and the Court has to apply its Judicious mind. The object of Section 227 is to see that, if the accused is innocent and no grounds are available to proceed against him, he should not be made to suffer an ordeal of long trial before the court. If no materials are available, instead of wasting time, the matter should be nipped at the bud and the court should bear-in-mind that it is an important stage to consider all the materials on record and thereafter to pass appropriate orders.

6. At this stage it is worth to refer a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in P. Vijayan vs. State of Kerala, AIR 2010 SC 663 wherein it has been observed thus:

"If two views are possible and one of them gives rise to suspicion only, as distinguished from grave suspicion, the Trial Judge will be empower