TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (12) TMI 602
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on. Accused are officials of revenue department. The complaint and the sworn statement of the complainant prima facie disclose that he went to the office of the accused on 20.1.2003 at 5.00 p.m. to enquire about the supply of certified copy of record of rights of the property pertaining to his client. The accused, instead of reasonably and properly responding to the complainant about the supply of the copies of fresh record of rights, started abusing the complainant. It is alleged that the accused has uttered the following words against the complainant. Thereafter, the complainant was pulled out of the office by the accused. Based on the said complaint and the sworn statement, the Trial Court has issued process against the petitioners for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Accused Nos. 1 and 2 for the offences punishable under Sections. 323, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC. The officials are hereby directed to register the case as C.C. in Register No. III against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC and to issue process to the accused for the said offences, if P.F. paid and copies furnished." It is also not in dispute that before passing the said order, the sworn statements were recorded. Based on this material, Sri. CM. Jadhav, Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that cognizance is taken after recording of sworn statements and that therefore, the order of issuing of process is liable to be quashed, inasmuch as, the procedure ado....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has taken cognizance of the offences at the initial stage itself. Hence, it can be safely said that the Magistrate has applied his mind and thereafter, recorded the sworn statements of the witnesses. Thus, the subsequent observation of the Learned Magistrate at the time of passing the aforesaid order that the cognizance taken becomes redundant and shall have to ignored. Even otherwise, it may amount to taking cognizance or applying mind to the facts of the case for the second time, at the time of passing of impugned order and the same is not barred. Hence the same cannot be said to be illegal. Moreover, the order of issuing process cannot be set aside merely on such hypertechnical ground. Added to it, no prejudice is caused to the petition....