Consent mentioned in section 494 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not to be given mechanically. The Court is to exercise its function judicially before giving such consent, which implies that the Court will have to examine the materials on which the Government decides withdrawal of a case. In the instant case no reason/ground has been assigned for the withdrawal of the case and there is no indication that materials were considered before taking the decision. When the accused persons are still absconding the discretion to withdraw the case ought not to have been exercised.

(Prativa Rani Dey Tirtha Vs. Dr. Mohammad Yousuf, Chittagong Medical College & Others, 1999, 28 CLC (AD) [570])

The very word "consent" occurring in section 494 of the Code of Criminal Procedure clearly indicates that it is not to be considered lightly on the application of the Public Prosecutor without a careful and proper scrutiny of the grounds on which the application is based.

(60 DLR (HCD) (2008) 1) 

Where consent is given substantially, the court does not look very minutely into the form in which it is given. 

(Re Smith, 59 LJ Ch 284) 

Consent must imply a knowledge of the necessary facts and materials which leads to the consent, consent can not be given in the abstract or in vacuum.

(Walchandragar Industries Ltd. V. Ratanchand Khimchand Motishaw, AIR 1953 Bom 285, 286)