JUDGMENT 1. - This is a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. against the order dated 8th June, 1990, passed by the Additional Judicial Magistrate No. 5, Ajmer, by which the cognizance of the offence under Section 00 Indian Penal Code was taken against the present petitioner on the basis of a criminal complaint filed by one Smt. Nawal Devi, who is respondent No. 1 before this Court. 2. Precisely, the facts giving rise to this petition are as under : Smt. Nawal Devi Jain had been working as Matron in the Government College, Ajmer. Amar Chand Sharma was Laboratory Assistant in the same college. The present petitioner Laxman K. Bhatia was the Principal of the said College. It is stated that there were certain complaints against Nawal Devi Jain and Amar Chand. On the basis of these complaints, a preliminary enquiry was held against Smt. Nawal Jain and Amar Chand. On the basis of the enquiry report and the record produced before the Director, College Education, he came to the conclusion that Smt. Nawal Devi and Amar Chand were prima facie guilty. The Director, College Education directed the Principal, Government College, Ajmer i.e. the present petitioner Laxman K. Bhatia to hold an enquiry against both of them under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958. In pursuance of the same, a charge-sheet was served upon Amar Chand as well as Smt. Nawal Devi Jain in a sealed cover. On 9th March, 1990, it is alleged, there was a party of the birth-day celebration of Amar Chand's son Abhishek, where Nawal Devi Jain and her husband also went to the house of Amar Chand. There Amar Chand showed the copy of the charge-sheet. Smt. Nawal Devi herself along with her husband read the same. Smt. Nawal Devi thereupon filed a complaint making out a case under Section 500 Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner Laxman K. Bhatia on the basis of the said charge-sheet. This complaint was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 5, Ajmer on 22nd May, 1990. Smt. Nawal Devi herself along with her husband read the same. Smt. Nawal Devi thereupon filed a complaint making out a case under Section 500 Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner Laxman K. Bhatia on the basis of the said charge-sheet. This complaint was filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 5, Ajmer on 22nd May, 1990. The learned Magistrate after recording the statement of Smt. Nawal Devi Jain and her husband Prem Chand held that a prima facie case punishable under Section 500 Indian Penal Code is made out against Laxman K. Bhatia and took cognizance under Section 500 Indian Penal Code against the petitioner, registered the case and ordered the complainant to file process and a list of witnesses and after filing the process Laxman K. Bhatia be summoned, vide her order dated 8th June, 1990. The said order is under challenge in this petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. Shri K.N. Shrimal appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that merely because the petitioner had served a charge-sheet upon the complainant Smt. Nawal Devi Jain, it cannot be said that any case under Section 500 Indian Penal Code could be made out against the petitioner on the basis of the allegations contained in the complaint, which were there as the subject-matter of the charge-sheet served upon Smt. Nawal Devi Jain. He has also submitted that if at all the Magistrate was to take cognizance against the petitioner, requirement of sanction under Section 97, Cr.P.C. was necessary because the charge-sheet had been served by the petitioner as a part and parcel of his official duty. 3. I have gone through the order dated 8th June, 1990, passed by the Judicial Magistrate. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am shocked to read the order dated 8th June, 1990, in which cognizance has been taken under Section 500 Indian Penal Code merely because a charge-sheet was issued by the present petitioner. Apart from the fact that on the basis of the record of this case which has been perused, including the statements which were recorded as also the complainant's allegations in the complaint and the impugned order, no ingredients whatsoever under Section 500 Indian Penal Code are made out so as to justify taking of cognizance against the present petitioner. Apart from the fact that on the basis of the record of this case which has been perused, including the statements which were recorded as also the complainant's allegations in the complaint and the impugned order, no ingredients whatsoever under Section 500 Indian Penal Code are made out so as to justify taking of cognizance against the present petitioner. It appears that the concerned Magistrate has not even cared to see the scope of Section 00, IPC. It is an additional fact that without caring for the scope of the relevant provision cognizance was taken by the Magistrate by making a bald mention with regard to the charge sheet. All that has been stated in the statement is that charge-sheet has been issued by the present petitioner and this charge-sheet was read by Smt. Nawal Devi and her husband Prem Chand in a party which on the face of it appears to be unnatural. All these allegations hardly constitute a case under Section 500 Indian Penal Code against the present petitioner. On this basis, cognizance has been taken and a scant regard has been shown by the concerned Magistrate for the scope of Section 00 Indian Penal Code while passing the impugned order dated 8th June, 1990. Taking cognizance in such matters clearly amounts to the abuse of the process of the Court and, I have no hesitation in holding that on the basis of such an order the proceedings cannot be allowed to continue against the present petitioner. If the cognizance is allowed to be taken in such cases no disciplinary authority may ever venture to charge-sheet an employee and the whole concept of disciplinary control would stand defeated. 4. For the reasons stated above, the impugned order dated 8th June, 1990, proceedings taken and the complaint filed against the petitioner pending in the concerned Court are quashed and set aside. A copy of this order may also be sent to the concerned Magistrate so that she may be careful in future. 5. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is allowed as indicated above. The record of this case may be sent back immediately.Petition allowed. *******