1 S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1408/2008 ATUL KULSHRESHTH V. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANOTHER. DATE OF ORDER : 06-11-2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. M. TOTLA Mr. Arvind Shreemali & Mr. Amit Vyas, for Petitioner (s). Mr. S.N.Tiwari, PP, for the State. Learned Public Prosecutor accepts notice on behalf of the State. On complaint of petitioner, FIR registered which resulted in FR submitted before the Magisterial Court. The Magisterial Court, vide order dated 18.11.06, taking cognizance for the offence of Section 323, IPC, issued process for respondent No.2. Assailing above cognizance order, respondent No.2 preferred revision petition bearing No.8/07 which accepted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbatsar vide order dated 17.4.07 and order of Magistrate dated 28.11.06 taking cognizance quashed. Aggrieved of the above order, is this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. and by this petition, petitioner requests setting aside the order of revisional Court and order taking cognizance be restored. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that (1) the Magistrate on the material available and examined all the aspects, taking cognizance registered case. (2) The learned Additional Sessions Judge has gravely erred and has not even considered injury report of petitioner. (3) When cognizance is taken, learned Additional Sessions Judge ought not to have gone in factual detail. (4) There is no illegality or manifest error in the Magisterial order. Submitting photostat copies of injury report of petitioner, argued that cognizance should be restored. Considered and perused record and both the orders. The order of learned Magistrate dated 28.11.06 mentions no ground of taking cognizance except that looking to the FIR and injury report, case is made out. Learned Additional Sessions Judge has mentioned in page 2 and 3 of 2 the order – has perused all the statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. and for the reasons mentioned in the order, has quashed the cognizance. Petitioner and respondent No.2 are spouses. Considering that the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is quite elaborate and based on facts, the petition has no force and is dismissed. (C. M. TOTLA), J. scd