Cr Msc Pet 617/10 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Criminal Misc Petition No.617/2010 Bhushan @ Braj Bhushan Versus State & Ors Date of Order ::: 17/05/2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Anil Upman, for petitioner. Mr. Mahendra Meena, Public Prosecutor. Instant criminal misc. petition has been filed U/s 482, CrPC assailing order dt. 04/12/2009 (Ann.2) of the Court of Revision (Addl. Sess. Judge No.2, Bharatpur) whereby cognizance taken by trial Magistrate (Judl. Mag. No.2, Bharatpur) vide order dt.10/06/2009 (Ann.1) for the offences U/Ss 341, 323, 504, IPC against respondents-2 to 6, has been set aside on the premise that the trial Magistrate was not justified in taking cognizance without due compliance of S.197, CrPC and prior permission from the authority under law. It appears from the record that a private complaint was filed by petitioner for offences having been committed by accused U/s 341, 323, & 504, IPC. Taking note of contents of complaint and so also statements recorded U/Ss 200 & 202, CrPC, learned trial Magistrate took cognizance of offences U/Ss 341, 323, & 504, IPC. For the self same incident, at the same time, Government Officials also filed their complaint, which as informed, is still Cr Msc Pet 617/10 //2// pending and no action has been taken. After the cognizance being taken by learned trial Magistrate vide order dt. 10/06/2009, the Government officials filed revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge. Taking note of material on record, Court of Revision finally observed that being Government officials, action has been taken in discharge of official duties, as alleged; as such, learned trial Magistrate was not justified in taking cognizance without seeking prior permission of the authority U/s 197, CrPC; accordingly, the order taking cognizance against respondents-accused was set aside vide order dt.04/12/2009 (Ann.2 This Court has considered rival contentions of Counsel for the parties and with their assistance, examined the material on record. This Court does not find any manifest error being committed by Court of revision which may call for interference in the order impugned. Consequently, criminal misc. petition fails and is hereby dismissed. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p2/ 617CrMscPet10May17Ds482.doc