ORDER :

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for O.P. No. 2.

2. This case has been listed today under the heading for Orders on a petition being I.A. No. 6862 of 2019, praying therein to extend the period of stay, which was granted in favour of these petitioners by this Court vide order dated 08.10.2014. Now, all the parties agree for final disposal of the case, rather than to argue on the stay petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the cognizance and summoning order dated 13.08.2013, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar in Complaint Case No. C-20 of 2013 is under challenge. He submits that the impugned order will show that the Court has not applied its mind while taking cognizance. He submits that merely in a mechanical manner, cognizance has been taken in this case and thereafter summons have been issued against these petitioners. It is argued that before issuing summons, the Magistrate is duty bound to record his satisfaction that there are sufficient materials to proceed against the accused persons and then only he should issue summons. He further submits that this is a mandate casted upon the Magistrate in terms of Section 204 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which has been over looked by the Magistrate while issuing process under Section 204 Cr.P.C.

4. Learned counsel appearing for O.P. No. 2 submits that the cognizance was taken after going through the statements of the witnesses and the Court found that there is prima-facie case made out under Sections 147, 341, 323, 325 & 504 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that some of the witnesses were the injured witnesses, who also sustained fracture injuries on the hands of these petitioners. Thus, according to him, the court has rightly taken cognizance against the petitioners for the offence.

5. I have gone through the records of the case and the composite cognizance order and the order issuing process.

6. An FIR was registered being Chandwa P.S. Case No. 33 of 2011 against these petitioners for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 379, 325 & 427 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, the police submitted final form exonerating these petitioners. A protest -cum-complaint was filed by O.P. no. 2, which was registered as Complaint Case C-20 of 2013. After inquiry, the impugned order dated 13.08.2013 was passed by the Magistrate. While I go through the impugned order, I find that it has been mentioned therein that four inquiry witnesses were examined and on perusal of their statements, the Court found that prima-facie case is made out for committing an offence punishable under Sections 147, 341, 323, 325 & 504 of the Indian Penal Code against all the five accused persons/petitioners. Thereafter, summons was issued to the accused persons. This impugned order dated 13.08.2013 is a composite order, i.e. an order taking cognizance and an order issuing summons.

7. Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides for taking cognizance of an offence. Relevant portion of Section 190(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as follows:-

“190. Cognizance of offences by Magistrates-(1) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, any Magistrate of the first class, and any magistrate of the second class specially empowered in this behalf under sub-section (2), may take cognizance of any offence;-

(a) upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such offence;

(b) upon a police report of such facts;

(c) upon information received from any person other than a police officer, or upon his own knowledge, that such offence has been committed.”

8. From perusal of the aforesaid provision of law, I find that a court can take cognizance under Section 190(1) (a) upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such offence and (b) upon a police report of such facts, and on upon information received from any person etc.

9. In this case, ad