ONKARLAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE four petitioners; Onkarlal and others, have challenged the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Udaipur dated 28. 7. 1981, by which cognizance of offence under Section 366 I. P. C. had been taken against the petitioners as also one Vinod.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the record. Only two contentions have been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The first contention is that except the statement of prosecutrix Smt. Asha u/sec. 164 Cr. P. C. There is no other material on the record on which the learned Magistrate could have taken cognizance of the offence U/sec. 366 I. P. C. against the present petitioners and that statement also is quite contrary to what she had stated before the police u/sec. 161 Cr. P. C. The second contention in the alternative is that if the first contention is not accepted and the order taking cognizance is not quashed then the petitioners may be granted anticipatory bail u/sec. 438 Cr. P. C