M. K. SHAH, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an application by the original accused against whom proceedings for the offence under sec. 298 of the Indian Penal Code are instituted and are pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magi- strate First Class Baroda. ( 2 ) A few facts leading to the filing of the said prosecution against petitioner-original accused may be briefly stated: the petitioner-Original accused is Editor and publisher of a weekly called Aaspas published from Ahmedabad. The complainant claims to be the disciple of Bhagwan Shri Rajnishji and it is his case that by publishing an article under the caption Why Acharya Rajnishji leaves Pune ? in the issue of 31st of July 1977 of the said Magazine the editor of the said Magazine as also the author of the article who is accused No. 2 acted with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of the complainant and other followers of Acharya Shri Rajnishji. The complainant prayed for a process against the accused in his complaint for the offence under sec. 298 of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Magistrate after examining the complaint on 27th of September 1977 issued process under sec. 298 of the Indian Penal Code. ( 3 ) THE petitioner has preferred this Criminal Misc. Application invo- king jurisdiction of this court under its inherent powers which are recog- nised by the provisions of sec. 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code on the ground that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to take cogniz- ance of the complaint under sec. 298 of the Indian Penal Code and the process therefore ought not to have been issued and it is prayed that the proceedings before the learned Magistrate be quashed. ( 4 ) IT has been urged by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner-accused that in the instant case admittedly on the showing of the complaint itself the affording statements were made not orally but in a written article published in a weekly magazine and prima facie there- fore such an act would not amount to an offence within the meaning of sec. 298 of the Indian Penal Code. 298 of the Indian Penal Code. Sec. 298 reads thus"whoever with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any gesture in the sight of that person or places any object in the sight of that person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year or with Sue or with both". It is clear from bare reading of the section itself that what is contempl- ated is an act of uttering of a word or making any sound or any gesture or placing any object in the hearing or sight of the person offended. There is no allegation in the complaint that any such offending act was done by the accused. The complaint is based on an article which was published in the Magazine and any offence being committed thereby within the meaning of sec. 298 of the I. P. Code is therefore ruled out. The learned Magistrate therefore was clearly in error in issuing process under sec. 298 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused in the instant case and the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 9994 therefore deserve to be quashed. It may however be made clear that this would not deprive the complainant of his right to any action which he may take according to law as advised in respect of the publication of the said article against the accused. ( 5 ) THE application therefore succeeds. Rule is made absolute and the proceedings before the learned Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 9994/77 are hereby quashed. Application allowed. .