1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR S.B. Crl. Miscellaneous Petition No.441/2010 (Nazir Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.) Date of Order : 15.03.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI Mr.Anil Jain, for the petitioner. Mr.G.S.Fauzdar, PP. By the Court: By this miscellaneous petition, the order dated 04.03.2010 so as the order dated 01.12.2009 have been challenged. Pursuant to the FIR, the police submitted negative Final Report on investigation. The trial Court took cognizance of the offence vide order dated 01.12.2009. The petitioner preferred a revision petition against the said order but the same was also dismissed vide order dated 04.03.2010. Aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, this miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed. It is submitted that the Court below took cognizance in ignorance of the facts narrated in the FIR lodged by the petitioner against the complainant as there exist cross-cases. The police came on spot on telephonic call given by the petitioner when complainant party started throwing stones on them. The police taking note of complainants' presence on occurrence, came to the conclusion that false report was made by the complainant, thus negative Final 2 Report was given. The aforesaid Final Report has been brushed aside without any material. Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand submits that it is literally a second revision petition in view of the fact that order of cognizance was challenged in a revision petition. Against the order passed in revision petition, criminal petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed, which is nothing but amounts to second revision petition. In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, a second revision petition should not be entertained unless a case falls in the category of rare of rarest cases. The facts of this case cannot be looked into in that regard having been seen by the trial Court taking cognizance and so as the Revisional Court. The petitioner has argued the questions of facts, which have already been taken note of by the Court below, thus this Court may not interfere in the impugned order. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and scanned the matter carefully. It is true that the police had given negative Final Report narrating certain facts. The Court below, however, took cognizance and thereby negative Final Report was not accepted. Aggrieved by the order of cognizance, the petitioner preferred a revision petition. The revision petition was dismissed by a detailed order. The petition under Section 482 of 3 Cr.P.C. has now been filed, which is nothing but literally a second revision petition, thus not maintainable under the normal circumstances. The law propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is quite clear on that issue and in view of the aforesaid, second revision petition in the shape of petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be entertained in rare of rarest cases. After considering the record of the case, I do not find that it is a case where interference can be made by entertaining second revision petition, accordingly the miscellaneous petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise all the arguments as otherwise raised herein while arguing the matter for framing of the charges. (M.N. BHANDARI),J. Preety Item NO.13