JUDGMENT 1. - By this criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has assailed the order dated 2.3.2005 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begu (in short The trial Court') in Criminal Original Case No. 56/05 whereby the trial Court took cognizance of offence on the negative final report filed by the police and issued the process. Aggrieved of the order impugned, the petitioner has filed the instant petition. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order impugned. I have also gone through the statements of complainant Bhanwar Lal and the witnesses produced by him namely Radhey Shyam, Moti Lal and Shiv Lal. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that from the statements of these witnesses as also the material made available by the investigating agency before the trial Court, the very essential ingredients for the offence under Section 327 I.P.C. are not made out. Section 327 I.P.C. reads as under: "327. Voluntarily causing hurt to extort property, or to constrain to an illegal act. Whoever voluntarily causes hurt, for the purpose of extorting from the sufferer, or from any person interested in the sufferer, any property or valuable security, or of constraining the sufferer or any person interested in such sufferer to do anything which is illegal or which may facilitate the commission of an offence shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine." 3. A plain reading of Section 327 I.P.C. shows that it is essentially required to constitute offence under this Section that a person should voluntarily cause hurt, for the purpose of extorting from the sufferer, or from any person interested in the sufferer, any property or valuable security, or should constrain the sufferer or any person interested in such sufferer to do anything which is illegal or which may facilitate the commission of an offence. In the instant case, from the statements of witnesses it appears that on 15.5.2004 in a village, two bulls, one belonging to the complainant Bhanwar and the other- to. Tulsi Ram quarrelled and in that process, the bull belonging to Tulsi Ram is alleged to have succumbed to the injuries after 5-6 hours of the occurrence. In the instant case, from the statements of witnesses it appears that on 15.5.2004 in a village, two bulls, one belonging to the complainant Bhanwar and the other- to. Tulsi Ram quarrelled and in that process, the bull belonging to Tulsi Ram is alleged to have succumbed to the injuries after 5-6 hours of the occurrence. The allegation against the present petitioner is that he pacified the matter and persuaded the parties to compromise and it appears that in compromise the complainant has paid some amount to the owner of the bull which is said to have been killed in the occurrence by another bull owned by the complainant. Thus from the occurrence as disclosed by the complainant, in my view, no offence under Section 327 I.P.C. is made out. There is no evidence that the petitioner caused hurt to complainant in order to extort money or property or constrained him or any person interested in him to do anything which is illegal or which may facilitate the commission of an offence. 4. In the circumstances, therefore, the trial Court fell in error in taking cognizance for the offence under Section 327 I.P.C. and issuing process against the petitioner. 5. In the result, the petition succeeds and is hereby allowed and the order impugned dated 2.3.2005 passed by the trial Court is set aside. Stay petition stands disposed of.Petition allowed. *******