THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1009 of 2009 ORDER: Petitioners approach this Court with a prayer to set aside the order of cognizance taken by the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Narasapuram, against them for the offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC, in P.R.C.No.40 of 2008. The main grievance of the petitioners herein is that even though the investigating agency has not included Section 354 of IPC in the charge sheet, on the basis of the material collected by the investigating agency, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against them for the offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC. The same is questioned before this Court. This Court is of the view that it is not necessary that the learned Magistrate should take cognizance of the offence only on the basis of the charge sheet filed by the respondent police, but he is at liberty to peruse the entire records relied on by the prosecution and take cognizance when an offence is made out. In the present case, the counsel for the 2nd respondent submitted that LW.1, who is the aggrieved person, has stated before the police while examination under Section 161 Cr.P.C. regarding the outrage of the modesty. Hence, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 354 IPC. However, if the petitioners are aggrieved by the order of cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate, they are at liberty to raise their grievance before the trial Court at the time of trial and also question the Investigating Officer the reason for deleting Section 354 of IPC. Hence, this Court is of the view that there is no need to interfere with the order of cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate and the criminal petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. In any event, considering the circumstances of the case, the presence of the petitioners before the trial Court is dispensed with except on the dates the learned trial Judge insists for their presence and the petitioners shall be properly represented by their counsel before the trial Court. ____________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 11.03.2011 v v