SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1009/2007 Mohan Singh & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. { 1 } S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No.1009/2007 Mohan Singh & Ors. vs State of Rajasthan & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : - 8.7.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.VK Mathur, for the petitioners. Mr.Shambhoo Singh, for the complainant. Mr. VR Mehta, PP. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order dated 31.8.2006 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kapasan took cognizance for offences under Section 306/108 and 504 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the victim has not committed suicide, therefore, there arises no question of taking cognizance for offence under Section 306 or 306/108 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner also tried to submit that taking cognizance for other offence, which is under Section 504 IPC is also illegal. SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1009/2007 Mohan Singh & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. { 2 } Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that before passing interim order by this Court on 7th Sept., 2007 in the trial court charge was framed on 25th August, 2007 under Sections 108 read with Section 109 and 504 IPC and no charge under Section 306 IPC has been framed. It is also submitted that in view of the fact that after taking cognizance since charge has been framed, therefore, in view of the subsequent order, challenge to cognizance cannot survive. The petitioner was right in challenging the order dated 31.8.2006 as cognizance was taken for commission of offence under Section 306/148 IPC and nobody has committed suicide. In view of the above reasons there could not have charge under Section 306/108 IPC. Taking of cognizance will be of no use in view of the fact that the trial court itself even after taking cognizance for offence under Section 306/108 IPC has not framed the charge against the petitioner under Section 306 or 306/108 IPC. The charge has been framed under Section 504 and Section 108 and 109 IPC as submitted by learned counsel for the complainant. The subsequent order framing charge is not under SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1009/2007 Mohan Singh & Ors. Vs. State & Anr. { 3 } challenge in this petition. In view of the above reasons, I do not find any reason to set aside the said order, which has become infructuous so far as offence under Section 306 and 306/108 IPC are concerned. Hence, the misc petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.Goyal/-