ORDER

Leave granted.

The accused is the appellant. On the basis of FIR lodged by the driver of DTC bus, the investigation was carried and the police finally filed charge-sheet under Sections 186, 332 and 353/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate, however, took cognizance of the offence and framed charges under Sections 186 and 332/34, IPC. The accused then moved the High Court under Section 482, Cr.P.C. alleging that in view of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cognizance under Section 186, IPC as well as under Section 332, IPC could not have been taken. The High Court having rejected the application, the accused is before us.

2. Mr. Jain appearing for the accused appellant contended that in view of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the offence under Section 186, IPC as it is barred under Section 195(1)(a)(i). He further contended that even the cognizance under Sections 332/34, IPC also would be barred as the offence under Section 332, IPC is a cognate offence, and therefore the entire proceeding is bad. Mr. Jain also further contended that the allegations made and the materials available on record do no