- (1.) Heard Sri Manoj Gautam, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C challenges an order dated 29.3.2016, passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahoba? in Case No. 25/2016 (Case Crime No.212/2015) (State vs. Khimmu and others), taking cognizance in respect of applicant nos 1 & 2 for offences under Sections 323/504/506 IPC and applicant no. 3 under Sections 354/392/323/504/506 IPC and 8 of the POCSO Act.
(3.) It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that initially NCR No.62/2015, under Sections 323/504/506 IPC in respect of an occurrence dated 14.9.2015 came to be filed by O.P. No.2 as against the applicants, who were challaned under Section 151 Cr.P.C and released on personal bond. Subsequently after 3 days, an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C was filed exaggerating the allegations to constitute an offence under Sections 376/511/392/504/506 IPC and 8 of the POCSO Act, pursuant to which an FIR was registered, in which after investigation, charge-sheet came to be submitted only under Section 504 IPC, but the court below under the order impugned, took cognizance and summoned applicant nos. 1 & 2 under Sections 323/504/506 IPC and applicant no. 3 under Sections 354/392/323/504/506 IPC and 8 of the POCSO Act. It is finally submitted that without rejecting the final report other than Section 504 IPC, cognizance as well as summoning in respect of summoned offences, stands vitiated in law.;