GANPAT RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This misc. petition is directed against the order dated 28.11.96 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Tara Nagar whereby he took cognizance against the petitioners under section 295 and 379 IPC.

(2.) Mr. Shah contends that the order of the Magistrate is not sustainable for two reasons, one the, learned Magistrate has not applied his mind to the facts of the case and has simply obeyed the directions of the Addl. Sessions judge. Two, the cognizance has been taken after the expiry of period of limitation and the delay having not been condoned by the Magistrate, the cognizance is bad.

(3.) Mr. Choudhary on behalf of Mr. Goel contends that the police papers clearly show that the offence was committed by the petitioner and therefore, the order of the Magistrate is proper. He is not in a position to meet the contention that the cognizance was barred by limitation.