S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 678/2007 MAHENDRA SINGH & ANOTHER V. THE STATE OF RAJ. & ANOTHER. DATE OF ORDER : 06-11-2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. M. TOTLA Mr. Sikandar Khan, for Petitioner (s). Mr. O.P. Rathi, PP, for the State. In course of trial in Sessions Case No.109/06 before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Bikaner, the learned Judge vide order dated 1.5.07 taking cognizance for both the petitioners registered case against them for the offences of Sections 341, 323, 307 read with Section 34, IPC. Aggrieved by the above order, is this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that (1) charge-sheet was not submitted against the petitioners. (2) In FIR and statements under Section 161, Cr.P.C., also, there are no direct allegation for any petitioners. (3) Even in statement before the Court of injured Sawai Singh, not very definite allegations for petitioner is. (4) If any material existed or statements under Section 161, Cr.P.C., sufficient to take cognizance, could have been taken earlier and as not taken, implies that material was and is not sufficient for taking cognizance. (5) Registering case on such allegation s and without strong basis is abuse of process. Learned Public Prosecutor rebutting and opposing above arguments , submitted that the order is speaking one and injured has attributed injuries to petitioners. Considered and perused the order of the learned Judge. The order finds mentions of what is attributed for petitioners. At this stage, in petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., very detailed analysis of facts is not warranted - still looking at the statement of the injured, it is apparent that direct positive allegation for petitioner is (in FIR and statements under Section 161, Cr.P.C., also mention is of some act) which cannot be outrightly said to be not related to incident. Looking to above, there is no force in this petition. The petition is dismissed. (C. M. TOTLA), J.