Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) By way of instant misc. petition, challenge has been made to the order dated 27. .2006 passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nokha in Criminal Case No. 456/2006, whereby cognizance of offence under Section 506 Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioners.
(2.) Assailing the order of the Court below, learned cotmsel for the petitioners submits that in this case, the respondent No. 2-complainant filed an application before the Court below praying for prosecution of the petitioners for the said offence. The learned Magistrate straight away directed the police to make an enquiry upon the complaint and upon receiving the enquiry report, the Magistrate without recording the statement of the complainant and her witnesses as warranted under Sections 200 and 202 Criminal Procedure Code has taken cognizance against the petitioners. Learned counsel further submits that the provision of Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code is mandatory and cognizance upon a complaint is not permissible, unless the statement of the complainant has been recorded on oath tinder the said provision. Thus, he prays that the order taking cognizance amounts to abuse of process of law.
(3.) Learned counsel for the complainant is not in a position to dispute the fact that no statement of the complaint was recorded under Section 200 Criminal Procedure Code in this matter.;