1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO.1188/2010 (Rampal Vs. State & Anr.) Date of Order : 11.08.2010 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Ashok Upadhyay, for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Joshi, Public Prosecutor. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. In this case, cognizance has been taken against the petitioner upon the final report given by the police and in pursuance of the order of cognizance the petitioner appeared before the learned Magistrate but challenged the order of cognizance by way of filing revision petition. The said revision petition was also dismissed by the revisional Court vide order dated 07.05.2010. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the fact with regard to refusal of mutation is on record was raised for consideration at the time of taking cognizance but learned Magistrate did not consider the said fact and took cognizance and in revision, the revisional Court also did not 2 consider all the grounds taken by the petitioner in right prospect, therefore, both the orders passed by Courts below may be quashed and set aside. In my opinion, no error has been committed by both the Court below. The petitioner is required to raise his ground at the time of framing charge by the trial Court against him. It is expected from the trial Court that at the time of framing charge grounds taken by the petitioner shall be considered and decided while passing speaking order. With the above observation, this misc. petition is disposed of. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J arun