R. BHATTACHARYYA, J. ( 1 ) -THIS Criminal Revision has been filed by the petitioners under section 482 of the Cr. P. C. , 1973 for quashing the proceedings in G. R. Case No. 323 of 1991 pending disposal before the learned S. D. LM. , Siliguri, Dist. Darjeeling. ( 2 ) THE Uncontroverted facts of the case are that the petitioner No. l and the opposite party were married according to Hindu rites. A child was born of the loins of the petitioner. The marital life of the parties was literally insalubrious which could not be repaired by either party, though promised. ( 3 ) THE petitioner No. 1, as agitated in the revisionist application, took his transfer from Katihar to Tindharia, Darjeeling. ( 4 ) CURIOUSLY, he again took a transfer to Katihar and advised his wife to stay at Shiliguri for promotion of education of the child. But, to utter dismay, the wife was booked with an information about the ex parte decree passed against her for divorce by the court of Katihar. She was taken aback by the conduct of the petitioner and put in an application under section 5 of the Limitation Act to cross the hurdle, though the petitioner threatened her wife dire consequences in the event she proceeded to Patna High Court for relief. On 19. 10. 91, the petitioner aided by some unknown persons stormed the house of the wife and forced her to subscribe her signatures to some blank demi-papers and decamped with the booties. ( 5 ) THE information lodged with the Police Station, Siliguri did not fructify when she was constrained to file the complaint seeking her redressal against the offence perpetrated by the petitioner and others. ( 6 ) THE learned court below, upon consideration of the materials on record which included amongst other, the examination of Uma Bhadra and her son on solemn affirmation, took cognizance and issued process for the offences alleged to have been committed by them under section 384/356 along with a further application praying for search warrant against the accused. ( 7 ) THE above order of the learned S. D. J. M. has pushed the petitioner, to the court of revision for a quashing ( 8 ) THE learned Advocate for the revisionist, Mr. ( 7 ) THE above order of the learned S. D. J. M. has pushed the petitioner, to the court of revision for a quashing ( 8 ) THE learned Advocate for the revisionist, Mr. Mukherjee has seriously disputed that the cognizance taken and the process issued against the petitioners are stricken with illegalities, and infirmities as the facts towering from the complaint do not constitute any commission of offence. He has laid much emphasis on the expressions as embodied in section 190a of the Cr. P. C. "upon receiving a complaint of facts which constitute such offence :" ( 9 ) TO add weight to the aforesaid contention, he has canvassed that the assault spoken of by the complainant in her complaint inflicted by the opposite party is a fanciful imagination, in the background of which process issued by taking cognizance is but a colorable exercise of jurisdiction. ( 10 ) THE examination of the complainant and her son on solemn affirmation does not even remotely prove the assault, the exploration of which is actuated by motive and malice. The decree of divorce passed against the complainant behind the territorial jurisdiction of the District Darjeeling inspired her to take a retaliatory measure without any truth behind the allegations. ( 11 ) THE contentions have been put to sever criticism by Mr. Sengupta, the learned Advocate appearing for the opposite party on the ground that the complaint is abound of materials to gear the Law into motion. The learned Magistrate. according to him, made a due consideration of the facts and circumstances that connoted from the complaint and the evidence. and as such the formation of the judgment by the learned Magistrate before the process issued reveals the overwhelming application of the judicial mind ( 12 ) TO evaluate the respective contentions of the parties, the first thing which stares on my face is, as to whether the facts disclosed upon receiving the complaint. if constitutes any offence. If section 190 is analysed in it, proper perspective, it is glaring that a Magistrate on receipt of the complaint could explit three avenues open to him. ( 13 ) ON receipt of a complaint he may order an investigation by the police : he may drop the proceedings after he receives a report under section 173 (1) of the Cr. ( 13 ) ON receipt of a complaint he may order an investigation by the police : he may drop the proceedings after he receives a report under section 173 (1) of the Cr. P. C. or he may take cognizance under section 190 (1)16) or lie may take cognizance of the offence under section 190 (1) (a) on the basis of the original complaint. ( 14 ) IN the background of the above, the Magistrate is quite competent, if he is of the opinion that the prima facie materials exist in connection with the commission of an. offence, to take cognizance of the case and may order issue process. ( 15 ) MR. Mukherjee to dislodge the claim of the wife has borrowed an inspiration from the case of J Th Zwart and Others v. Indrani Mukherjee Cal LT 1990 (1) HC 99 : 1990 C. Cr. LR (Cal) 1 that an allegation to come within the fold of complaint under section 2 (d) of the Code, the basic facts and circumstances, on the basis of which the allegations that generated the complaint are required to be stated. A mere allegation in the complaint without anything more does not arm the Magistrate to take cognizance. In such complaint, particulars of the case or an account of the evidence need not however, be incorporated. It must include such facts, on the basis of which, the allegation of the commission of an offence is being made. ( 16 ) MR. Mukherjee tried to build his argument on the edifice of sections 190 and 2 (d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The history of the allegations, according to him, does not constitute any offence and the assault spoken of by her in the complaint is an allegation merely on the paper without any substance behind it. Therefore, the learned. Magistrate, without appreciation of the ingredients of the offences took cognizance and issued process which is not permissible. In short, the facts are overwhelmingly absent which could constitute the commission of offences. The story of assailant has not been translated into evidence while the complainant and her son were examined on, solemn affirmation. Thus, the taking cognizance and process issued is an abuse of the process of the court for which a proceeding cannot be permitted to continue. ( 17 ) TO appreciate the argument of Mr. The story of assailant has not been translated into evidence while the complainant and her son were examined on, solemn affirmation. Thus, the taking cognizance and process issued is an abuse of the process of the court for which a proceeding cannot be permitted to continue. ( 17 ) TO appreciate the argument of Mr. Mukherjee, I have read through the evidence of the complainant and her son and verified them with the contents of the complaint. The combined effect of the complaint and the evidence certainly fosters commission of offence by the husband and others who accompanied them to her house. The expression "assault" does not inevitably mean that the complainant would be subjected to beating or any injury would be inflicted. ( 18 ) "assault" according to Aiyar's Judicial Dictionary means, "a present thereat of using force to the person of another accompanied by a real or apparent intention and ability to carry the threat into effect. If force is actually used it becomes battery. The gesture to strike a man comes under assault and if the blow is struck it is battery, though in common parlance it is called assault. This is English law. A person commits an assault under the Indian law if he makes a gesture or any preparation intending or knowing it to be likely that such gesture or preparation will cause any person present to apprehend that he is about to use criminal force to that person (section 351, I. P. C. ). An assault is something less than the use of criminal force, the force being cut short before the blow actually falls. An assault is include in every use of criminal force. Mere words do not amount to an assault but the words which the party threatening uses at the time may give his gestures such a meaning as may make them amount to an assault. " ( 19 ) ACCORDING to Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, it means : "any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an apparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, or doing bodily, to the person of another. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, or doing bodily, to the person of another. ( 20 ) IT may be culled out safely from the S. A.- 1 of Uma Bhadra"i was forced to sign on the blank papers. They also took away with my ornaments. I could not have signed on the documents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . me. " ( 21 ) THEN again S. A.-2 Soumendra Bhadra was loud enough to say that unknown person forced her mother. ( 22 ) IN the background of the above, the action of the petitioner and his associate prima facie verges on assault until rebutted. Therefore, I cannot agree with the contention of Mr. Mukherjee that infliction of injury on the body of the person or beating could only constitute assault. Taking the meaning attributed to assault as provided by Aiyar's Judicial Dictionary and Black's Law Dictionary, the show of force by putting the person under fear would constitute an offence of assault as the petitioner did in the instant case. Nonetheless, the taking away of ornaments by the petitioner and his associates would bring the case within the fold of prima facie commission of an offence of extortion. Such being the position, as towering from the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Magistrate was perfectly justified to take cognizance for the facts disclosed constituting an offence. The ruling cited by Mr. Mukherjee, therefore, is of no avail. ( 23 ) MR. Sengupta has strongly pleaded that materials present in the case negative the claim of Mr. Mukherjee. The genuineness of otherwise of the allegations would be substantiated in course of trial. It is too early to conclude that the materials disclosed in the case are patently devoid of substance. Besides, the ratio decidendi, as appears from the case of Mahinder Singh v. Gulabant Singh and Others, 1992 Cr LJ 3161, that the Bench (Supreme Court) consisting of three Judges held that during the course of enquiry under section 202 of the Code, the Enquiry Officer has to satisfy himself simply on the evidence adduced by the prosecution whether prima facie case has been made out so as to put the proposed accused on a regular trial and no detailed enquiry is called for during the course of such enquiry. ( 24 ) THUS, considering the conspectus of the facts and circumstances involved in the revision, I am of the view that the credibility of the claim put forward by the petitioners, is very low. Plainly, it cannot be accepted with any degree of precision of the claim of the petitioners. ( 25 ) FOR the reasons stated above, I have no hesitation to hold that the revision initiated for quashing the proceedings under section 482 is uncalled for. ( 26 ) IN view of what has been stated above, the revisional application is dismissed. Application dismissed. .