Perusal of the cognizance taking order reveals that the court has considered the supervision notes of the higher police officials and paras 4 and 5 of the case diary observing that a prima-facie case is made out for taking cognizance of the aforesaid offences against the petitioner. In fact, the court below has erred in not appreciating the fact that supervision notes are not a part of the materials collected in course of investigation. Admittedly, the closure report was submitted on the basis of the supervision notes of the higher police officials that the dispute was of civil nature. Therefore the satisfaction arrived at by the court below in making out a prima facie case on the basis of the supervision notes, by not assigning reasons, is self-contradictory in itself. 8. It is well settled proposition that supervision notes are not the materials collected by the police during investigation. The supervision notes, in fact, are directory in nature made by the higher officers and they do not form a part of police papers or the case diary to be used by the prosecution during the trial. 9. In the attending facts and circumstances, the order dated 16.11.2018 is, hereby, quashed and the matter is remitted to the court below to pass necessary order by assigning the reasons for differing and disagreeing with the closure report submitted by the police in accordance with law.
