[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1286/2005 ABDUL MANNAN KHAN & ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. Date: 12.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE None present for the petitioners. **** Brief facts of the case are that on 14.07.2002 a written report was submitted at Police Station Kotwali, Dausa on 14.07.2002 at about 9.00 p.m. for an occurrence alleged to have taken place on the same day, on the basis of which FIR No. 441/2002 was came to be registered for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 341 and 307 IPC. The police after investigation filed charge- sheet against the 10 accused persons for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 341 and 307 IPC including the present petitioner. On the basis of the challan filed by the police, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dausa took cognizance against the accused-petitioners and 8 other co-accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 341 and 307 IPC vide order dated 27.07.2004 and [2] committed the case under the provisions of Section 209 Cr.P.C. to the Court of Sessions Judge, Dausa on 26.08.2005. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the orders impugned dated 27.07.2004 and 26.08.2005 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dausa, the petitioners have preferred the instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The main challenge to the impugned orders is on the ground that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dausa has taken cognizance against the accused- petitioners in a mechanical and routine manner without appreciating the evidence available on record and also not followed the provisions of Section 190 Cr.P.C. Similarly before committing the case to the Sessions Judge, Dausa, the Chief Judicial Magistrate did not comply with the provision of Section 82,83 Cr.P.C. and has exceeded its jurisdiction in committing the remaining accused without procuring the attendance of all the accused persons as the case is exclusively triable by the Sessions Court and the Magistrate has no power to commit some accused persons and let the other accused remain with him and because the Court competent to try the offence only can order for [3] separation of trial. I have considered the averments made in the misc. petition and carefully gone through the orders impugned passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dausa and also considered the provision of Section 190 Cr.P.C. as well as Section 82,83 Cr.P.C. While taking cognizance, the trial Court has only to see whether prima-facie case is made out against the accused or not, and as the trial Court was prima-facie satisfied that the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 341 and 307 IPC are made out against the accused persons, therefore, cognizance for the aforesaid offences has been taken against the petitioners and other co-accused, which requires no interference by this Court. Similarly as the case is triable by the Sessions Court, therefore, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dausa has rightly committed the case to the Sessions Judge, Dausa. In the considered view of this Court, the Court below has not violated any provisions of Section 82,83 Cr.P.C, therefore, committal order also cannot said to be illegal on the face of record and this order also requires no interference by this Court. [4] Consequently, the misc. petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/ [5] S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLN. NO. 1527/2005 IN S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1286/2005 ABDUL MANNAN KHAN & ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. Date: 12.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE None present for the petitioners. **** As the misc. petition has been dismissed, the stay application also stands dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/ [6]