H.R. Panwar, J.— Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the Order impugned dated 18.8.2005 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rajsamand in Criminal Case No. 123 of 2004, whereby the substance of charge was read over to the petitioner who is facing trial for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. The requirement of Section 251 Cr.PC is that when in a summons case the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate, the particulars of the offence of which he is accused shall be stated to him, and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make, but it shall not be necessary to frame a formal charge. Thus, it is not required to frame

the charge but only substance of

accusation has to be stated to be accused.

3. From perusal of the Order impugned, it is more than clear that substance of accusation has been read over to the accused/petitioner. He did not plead guilty and sought trial. In this view of the matter, I am of the view that the requirement of Section 251 Cr.PC has been fulfilled. In the circumstances, therefore, I do not find any error, illegality of perversity in the Order impugned warranting interference.

4. Consequently, the revision

petition fails and is hereby dismis-sed. Stay petition also stands dismissed.

Revision dismissed.

*******