1. - By this petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 9th January, 2009 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.5, Jaipur City, Jaipur and the FIR No.25/2009, registered with Police Station-Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur.

2. A complaint was filed by the non-petitioner-Shri Krishna Kukkad on 09.11.2006. The court passed an order under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. with the direction to send the report on or before 11.12.2006. The Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur did not register the FIR but made inquiry by taking "rapat" in the "Rojnamcha". It then filed a report in the court on 18.11.2006 disclosing that no offence is made out. The complainant-non-petitioner filed an application on 26.03.2007 stating that mandatory provision of Section 154 Cr.P.C. has not been adhered to and the order of the court was violated in a deliberate manner by not registering FIR. The court below considered the application and called the explanation of the SHO, Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur. The order aforesaid was challenged by maintaining revision petition. The order was set aside with remand of the case for fresh order. The court then passed an order for registration of FIR in pursuance to the order dated 10.11.2006 and make investigation of the case. The FIR was then registered on 12.01.2009. It has been challenged by this petition.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner Shri Rajesh Kapoor submits that a complaint was filed by the non-petitioner based on news published in the newspaper and not based on his own knowledge. The allegation in the FIR is for allotment of land under political influence. For the said purpose, a forged application was filed in the name of Deendayal Smriti Trust. The trust was not registered by the time application was submitted and allotment order was issued. The registration of the trust was subsequent to the allotment, thus valuable land was got allotted by fraudulent means.

4. It is stated that the FIR was lodged in ignorance of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (in short "Act of 1959") and Rules made thereunder. The gist of the allegation is that without registration of public trust, application for allotment of land was made followed by its allotment. It was for valuable land, which could not have been allotted to an unregistered trust. The application so submitted does not disclose that the public trust is registered so as to consider it to be fraudulent. The mistake in filing of complaint occurred as it was based on news published in the daily newspaper without confirming the facts and the legal position. If the FIR is taken on its face value, no offence is disclosed if it is seen in reference to the legal provisions. The complaint is containing absurd allegations based on news published in the newspaper without proper information of facts and law. The trust was registered on 22.08.2006 i.e. prior to lodging of the complaint on 09.11.2006. The fact aforesaid has been mentioned in the FIR itself.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner gave reference of Section 17 of the Act of 1959 to show that registration of a public trust can be sought within a period of two years from its creation otherwise it can have penal consequences. In view of the above, registration of trust is not required from the date of its creation. The only necessity is to get the trust registered within a period of two years from the date of its creation. In the instant case, the trust was registered soon after its creation. It was well within the statutory period given for registration. In the background aforesaid, unregistered trust was having authority to make an application and no fraudulent act exist in making the application. If legal provisions are applied to the facts narrated in the FIR, no offence is disclosed.

6. Learned counsel further stated that the order dated 09.01.2009 has been challenged wherein direction is for registration of the FIR. The challenge to the said order has become infructuous, rather it was even at