1 S. B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION 825/2007 DHOLU SHAH & OTHERS V. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN. DATE : 07-11-2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. M. TOTLA Mr. S.R.Sharma, for Petitioner (s). Mr. S. N.Tiwari, PP, for the State – Respondent No.1. Mr.RK Charan & Mr. Pawan Deval, for Respondent No.2. For FIR No.70/05, registered for the offences under Sections 447 and 379, IPC, at Police Station, Bhaleri, a negative police report FR submitted and on protest application of complainant, after statements under Sections 200 and 202, Cr.P.C., - cognizance taken by learned Magistrate vide order dated 21.3.06 and case registered against the petitioners for the offences of Sections 447 and 379, IPC,- which order is affirmed by revisional court as per order of 18.5.07. Preferring this petition, petitioners have challenged above orders. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the revenue record for the land over which theft is alleged to have been committee is in favour of the petitioner for many years - this land handed over to Gyana Ram for cultivation, whose statements are recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., as per which, no offence committed Argued that even as per respondent-complainant, the land was given for cultivation to Gyana Ram, so no material exists for taking cognizance and that as revenue suit is also pending, so this matter is of civil /revenue nature and no material exists for cognizance and registering case. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that statements of few witnesses were recorded under Sections 200 & 202, Cr.P.C., and considering them, learned Magistrate ordered for registering the case and learned Sessions Judge, after examination of record, upheld order. Learned Public Prosecutor, opposing stated that both the orders impugned are quite speaking one. 2 Considered and perused the orders of the learned Magistrate and learned Sessions Judge. It is apparent that the learned Magistrate has considered entire material, including the negative police report. Learned Sessions Judge has also mentioned for the material – here arguments advances are based on facts which may be disputed one. Looking to above and considering the scope of Section 482, Cr.P.C., no case for any interference is made out. The petition is dismissed. The petitioners shall be free to raise all the objections at appropriate stage. The observations made in this order are solely in the context of deciding this petition. The petition stands dismissed. (C. M. TOTLA), J. scd