JUDGMENT 1. - Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this case, on the basis of First Information Report lodged by Ramphooi, Crime No. 194/94 for offences Under sections 147,148, 307, 336 and 452 Indian Penal Code was registered against the petitioners at police station Suroth, Distt. Sawai Madhopur. On investigation the police came to the conclusion that no offence, as reported by the complainant, had taken place in this case. Final Report Under section 169 Criminal Procedure Code was accordingly submitted. However, Ramphooi filed his protest petition whereupon the learned Magistrate recorded the statements of the complainant and his witnesses Under sections 200 and 202 Criminal Procedure Code and by his order dated 4.7.95 took cognizance of the offences Under sections 148, 448, 504 Indian Penal Code against the present petitioners. It appears that the petitioners challenged the order of the learned Magistrate before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Hindon who by his order dated 22.3.96 held that a revision petition against an order of taking cognizance was not maintainable before him. He accordingly directed the petitioners to approach the learned Magistrate and place their grievances before him. Instead of approaching the court of the Magistrate the petitioners have approached this Court Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 took a preliminary objection to the effect that since the order of the learned Magistrate dated 4.7.95 has already been revised by the learned Addl. Session Judge in exercise of his powers Under section 397 Criminal Procedure Code, the same order cannot be again examined in the arb of a petition Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code It was further submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that as per directions of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge the petitioners should have approached the learned trial Magistrate and placed their grievances before him. The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that looking to the facts and circumstances of this case this Court should interfere Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code 4. In view of the decision of this Court in the case of Khet Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, R.C.D. 1995(1) page 811 , as cited by the learned Addl.. The learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that looking to the facts and circumstances of this case this Court should interfere Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code 4. In view of the decision of this Court in the case of Khet Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, R.C.D. 1995(1) page 811 , as cited by the learned Addl.. Sessions Judge, an order of taking cognizance of an offence is not a revisable order and, therefore, a petition Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code can be preferred against such order. In view of that legal position the learned Sessions Judge can not be said to have examined the correctness and validity of the order passed by the learned Magistrate. However, I would have preferred that the petitioners must have approached the Magistrate and raised their objections before him instead of approaching this Court. However, after hearing the parties and looking to the facts that certain minor children and aged ladies have also been summoned by the learned Magistrate by his impugned order I have examined the record of the case from the angle whether any abuse of the process of the Court has been made in this case. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the statement of Ramphooi, complainant himself as recorded Under section 200 Criminal Procedure Code wherein the complainant has named only three petitioners namely Ram Charan, Radhey Shyam and Smt. Jagli as involved in the commission of an offence against him and his family. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 that witness Prithvi Lal had named the other petitioners can not do away with either the value of the Final Report of the police in this case or the prima facie probative value of the statement of Ramphooi himself as recorded Under section 200 Criminal Procedure Code The inclusion of rest of the petitioners under such circumstances in the order of taking congnizance amount to the abuse, of the process of the court. 6. In the result this petition is partly accepted, where as the order of the learned Magistrate of taking cognizance of the offences against Ram Charan, Radhey Shyam and Smt. Jagli is confirmed, the order relating to Mahendra, Samandar, Smt. Khillo and Miss. Kesuli @ Mamta is hereby set aside and the criminal proceedings against them in this case are quashed.Petition Partly Allowed. Kesuli @ Mamta is hereby set aside and the criminal proceedings against them in this case are quashed.Petition Partly Allowed. *******