1. - This criminal misc. petition u/s 482 Cr.RC. seeks quashing of the order dated 20.3.2003 passed by the Learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tonk in Criminal Complaint Case No. 253/2003 whereby cognizance for the offence u/s 193 I.RC. has been taken against the petitioners.

2. Shorn of details, the brief facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that one Rameshwar Khokhar working as Junior Accountant in Treasury, Tonk was residing in Government quarter No. T.R. 79, Civil Lines, Tonk. He moved an application before the Permanent Lok Adalat that the said quarter was in dilapidated condition. It requires immediate repairs relating to doors, electric fittings, white wash etc. and the road in front of the quarter also requires Tarcoal carpeting. The pressure in the water taps was also very low. Inspite of paying regular rent to the Department, the basic amenities of life are not being provided by it. A notice was issued to the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Tonk for 3.1.2003. On that day, his representative Mr. R.S. Bairwa, the Assistant Engineer appeared before the court. He did not file any written reply, but orally submitted that there being ban on the maintenance by the State Government circular dated 15.11.2002, required maintenance works could not be undertaken. A copy of the said circular was also produced. It appears that without insisting for a formal reply from the Department, the Court allowed the application of Mr. Khokhar and issued directions to do the necessary repairs of the quarter within a period of one month. Before the expiry of the afore-mentioned period of one month, the applicant moved another application i.e. on 14.1.2003 stating therein that the statement made by non-petitioner No. 1 on 3.1.2003 before the court was not true because by a subsequent circular dated 12.12.2002, the restrictions on the maintenance work were withdrawn which fact was in his knowledge. So, he prayed that he should be suitably punished. A notice of this application was also issued to both the petitioners on 15.1.2003 requiring them to submit their reply on 20.1.2003. On 20.1.2003 petitioner No. 1 submitted a reply to the application stating therein that due to non availability of the budget, the maintenance work of the said quarter could not be undertaken and prayed that application be dismissed. Petitioner No. 2 filed his reply on 7.2.2003 admitting that the circular dated 12.12.2002 was issued by the Chief Engineer, P.W.D., Jaipur wherein it was directed that no proposals for alteration/additions should be submitted before July, 2003 and extremely urgent repairs and maintenance may be got done departmentally from the relevant budget. A photostat copy of the aforesaid circular dated 12.12.2002 was also produced. Thereafter, the order dated 11.2.2003 was passed directing the Secretary of the Permanent Lok Adalat to file a complaint u/s 193 I.RC. against both the petitioners herein. The Secretary filed the complaint which has transferred to the Court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tonk who registered the same and issued process against the petitioners. The petitioners appeared before the court and were released on bail.

3. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners has very strongly argued that from a bare perusal of the order dated 20.3.2003 it is apparent that there is no application of mind. The process has been issued in a mechanical manner without passing formal order of taking cognizance and even without filing of the list of witnesses. He has also contended that non-petitioner No. 2 was not present on 3.1.2003 before the court and he had not made any oral or written statement before the court. Still he was made an accused for the offence u/s 193 I.RC. From the facts alleged, no offence u/s 193 I.RC. can be said to be even prima facie disclosed. According to him this criminal prosecution was launched against the petitioners at the behest of the then District & Sessions Judge