JUDGMENT 1. - Heard. 2. This petition has been filed under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code against the order dated 18-1-89 passed by the learned M.J.M., Pipar in Cr. Case No. 39/89, whereby the learned Magistrate after recording evidence under sections 200 and 202 Criminal Procedure Code took cognizance against the petitioners for the offences punishable under section 451 and 323 read with 34 Indian Penal Code Petitioners filed a revision petition before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Churu which was rejected as being time barred. Hence this petition. 3. The main contention of Mr. Bishnoi is that the learned Magistrate without applying his mind has taken cognizance against the petitioner because there was no evidence whatsoever prima facie to show that the petitioners had caused simple hurt to the complainant for want of any medico legal injury report. His another contention is that petitioner Kheta Ram is an Inspector in the I.B. and that he was not present on the day of alleged offence i.e. 15th August 1988 in the village and that a false case has been foisted against the petitioners. He has. therefore, prayed that the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate be quashed. 4. I have given my most anxious consideration to the submissions made by Mr. Bishnoi at the bar. 5. A perusal of the impugned order dated 18-1.89 establishes that the learned Magistrate has relied on the statements of the complainant Daula Ram, which is duly corroborated by PW 2 Mangilal and Chuna Ram and opined that prima facie, it appeared that the petitioners had entered into the complainant's thatchet and inflicted injuries to him by fist blows. Therefore, it cannot be held that that the learned Magistrate has not applied his mind or the facts incorporated in the complaint and the statements of the witnesses recorded by the learned Magistrate do not prima facie constitute the offences punishable under Sections 451 and 323/34 Indian Penal Code. 6. If a Magistrate is satisfied that on the facts incorporated in the complaint and the evidence recorded by him under sections 200 and 202 Criminal Procedure Code, a prima facie case is made out against the accused persons for a particular offence, then he is fully competent to take cognizance. At the stage of taking cognizance of an offence, it is not at all necessary for the Magistrate to take into consideration the defence. At the stage of taking cognizance of an offence, it is not at all necessary for the Magistrate to take into consideration the defence. which may be set up by the accused persons. 7. In the case in hand, the complainant has alleged that the petitioners had dealt slaps and fist blows to him. Therefore, simply for want of any medico legal injury report, the evidence recorded by the Magistrate cannot he held to be false and the same cannot be ignored or disbelieved. 8. Hence in my considered opinion, the impugned order of the learned Magistrate does not amount to any abuse of the process of the Court. If the complainant has maliciously foisted a false case against the accused petitioners, then they certainly have the appropriate remedy under the law. 9. In the result. this petition is hereby summarily dismissed. *******