(1.) THESE two revisions are directed against an order of the learned Judicial Magistrate (3), Jodhpur dated May 30, 1983 by which cognizance for an offence under section 352, IPC was taken on a private complaint and the accused was summoned to face trial. Since the revisions arise out of one and the same order, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment.
(2.) THE grievance of the complainant is that cognizance for offences under sections 323 and 504, IPC should have also been taken whereas the contention of the accused is that no cognizance of offence could be taken against him under Sec. 197, Cr. P. C. without the previous sanction of the State Government.
(3.) IT would be proper first to take up the revision filed by the complainant. IT was argued that there were no good and sufficient reasons not to believe the sworn statements of the complainant and his witness Ganpatmal. Both of them have stated that the accused showered abuses to the complainant and gave him fist blow on his face. These allegations make out the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 504, IPC. The learned Judicial Magistrate recorded no reason as to why he was impliedly dismissing the complaint for offences under Sections 323 and 504, IPC. I have bestowed my thoughtful consideration to the contention and find no merit in it.