- (1.) THE present revision has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 13.12.2013 passed by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vth, Kanpur Nagar in Case No.2909 of 2013, State Vs. Bhanu Kewat & others, under Sections 324, 323 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) X SC/ST Act, PS Maharajpur, District Kanpur Nagar by which cognizance has been taken on the charge sheet.
(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the revisionists as well as learned AGA.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the revisionists has mainly contended that the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance on the case without perusing the case diary and the charge sheet and applying his mind. It is submitted that according to the order impugned dated 13.12.2013 the charge sheet received, sufficient cause, cognizance taken, the case be registered and the accused be summoned for 28.1.14. Hence the order of taking cognizance and issuing summons is against the legal procedure. In support of his contention he placed reliance upon the decision of this court given in Akash Garg Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2012 76 ACC 103. I have considered the said argument as well as the decision of this Court given in Akash Garg Vs. State of U.P. and others. In the said decision, this court has also considered the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Fakruddin Ahmad V. State of Uttaranchal and another, 2009 64 ACC 774. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid verdict in paragraph 15 has held as under: "15. Nevertheless, it is well settled that before a Magistrate can be said to have taken cognizance of an offence, it is imperative that he must have taken notice of the accusations and applied his mind to the allegations made in the complaint or in the police report or the information received from a source other than a police report, as the case may be, and the material filed therewith. It needs little emphasis that it is only when the Magistrate applies his mind and is satisfied that the allegations, if proved, would constitute an offence and decides to initiate proceedings against the alleged offender, that it can be positively stated that he has taken cognizance of the offence. Cognizance is in regard to the offence and not the offender.";