Taking cognizance requires cogent reasoning and credible evidence; reliance solely on uncorroborated testimony is insufficient.

Order :

1. Instant revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 25.04.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Hanumangarh in Cr. FR No.53/2014, whereby the learned Judge did not accept the final report and took cognizance against the petitioner for offence punishable under Sections 323, 352 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that after thorough investigation, Police filed final report against the petitioner concluding that no case is made out against him. Counsel submits that there is no reason to disbelieve the final report submitted by the Police after thorough investigation. Counsel further submits that earlier one more FIR was filed against the petitioner by the complainant/respondent No.2, in which FR was filed by the Police, which was accepted by the competent court. Counsel submits that the impugned order of cognizance is per se illegal and deserves to be quashed and set aside.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondent No.2-complainant have supported the impugned order and submitted that after taking into consideration the material available on record, the trial court has rightly taken cognizance against the present petitioner for the aforesaid offences. The impugned order is a reasoned one and therefore, warrants no interference from this Court.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned as well as material available on record.

5. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the learned trial court has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences only relying upon the testimony of the complainant/respondent No.2, his wife and son, whereas, other witnesses of the case did not corroborate their version and they specifically denied the incident. In the present case, the police after thorough investigation filed a negative final report against the present petitioner and prima facie, there is no reason to disbelieve the said final report. In the impugned order, the learned trial court did not assign any cogent reason for taking cognizance against the petitioner for the aforesaid offences. Hence, the impugned order appears to be illegal and deserves to be quashed.

6. Consequently, the revision petition is allowed. The impugned order of taking cognizance dated 25.04.2018 passed by the trial court is hereby quashed and set aside.

7. Stay application is also decided.

8. Record of the case be sent back forthwith.